Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Adicionar filtros








Intervalo de ano
1.
Arq. bras. neurocir ; 39(2): 68-78, 15/06/2020.
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS | ID: biblio-1362493

RESUMO

Introduction The neurosurgical practice often involves situations that require rapid and immediate decisionmaking, and a very lowmargin for error may eventually lead to an unsatisfactory clinical outcome. Thus, neurosurgery is considered as a medical specialty with high risk for the occurrence of litigation for supposed malpractice. The main objective of the present study was to identify the most prevalent epidemiological profile of the authors of civil claims for alleged malpractice against neurosurgeons, as well as to identify the legal strategies most commonly employed in this type of lawsuit. Methods This is a descriptive, retrospective and quantitative study, with review of the initials/exordials of all civil actions motivated by alleged malpractice against neurosurgeons, defended by an office specialized in Medical Law, from 2008 to 2018. Data were collected relative to the author of the action; the disease that led to the outbreak of the action; and some legal information of interest for the outcome of the litigation. Results During the period studied, 16 compensation/eviction claims were identified as being motivated by supposed neurosurgical malpractice. The average age of the authors was 51 years old; with a high school or undergraduate level of education in 75% of the cases, and especially from the Class B social extract (43%). Degenerative affections of the lumbar spine (12 cases, 75%) were the most common diseases that motivated the litigation, followed by brain tumors (2 cases, 12.5%), 1 case of carpal tunnel syndrome, and 1 case of chronic pain due to inflammatory radiculitis. The average value of the sponsored claim was 649,000.00 reais. Justice gratuity was granted in 80% of the cases and the reversal of the burden of proof by 30%. The main documentary evidence was medical reports ­ from third parties or the surgeon him/herself, and medical records.


Assuntos
Brasil/epidemiologia , Erros Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Decisões Judiciais , Neurocirurgiões/ética , Epidemiologia Descritiva , Estudos Retrospectivos , Imperícia , Neurocirurgia/ética
2.
Arq. bras. neurocir ; 37(4): 309-316, 15/12/2018.
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS | ID: biblio-1362659

RESUMO

Introduction The objective of the present study was to review the epidemiological aspects of malpractice in neurosurgery and to identify preventive measures regarding malpractice for neurosurgeons. Methods The following terms (alone or in combination) were searched in the PubMed and Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde databases: neurosurgery (neurocirurgia), lawsuits (ações judiciais), malpractice (erro médico), and litigation (litígio) and identifying studies on these topics published from 2000 to April 2018. Literature Review In Brazil, 6.9% of the physicians are sued per year. The most common type of malpractice alleged in litigation is negligence. According to the literature, the neurosurgical disease that has sparked the most litigation is spinal disease. The outcomes of these cases vary: sometimes the neurosurgeon prevails, and at other times the plaintiff prevails. To prevent or reduce malpractice claims, the neurosurgeon should take the following precautions: 1. follow medical protocols; 2. perform surgeries in an environment consistent with good medical practice; 3. evaluate and monitor antibiotic prophylaxis; 4. develop a good relationship with the patient based on ethics, good faith and transparency; 5. request the presence of the patient and of his or her family when there is a problem in order to didactically explain the case; 6. keep good medical records to document all of the actions performed (informed consent and description of the surgery and of the pre and postoperative); 7. always seek technical improvement (continuing education/professional development); 8. in the case of attending physicians, monitor patients, treating any postoperative complications; and 9. conduct multidisciplinary team meetings to optimize treatment decisions and to share responsibility for making difficult decisions.


Assuntos
Erros Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Erros Médicos/prevenção & controle , Ética Médica , Imperícia/legislação & jurisprudência , Neurocirurgia/legislação & jurisprudência , Prática Profissional , Brasil , Neurocirurgiões/ética
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA