Testicular torsion in the medicolegal perspective: Why is the diagnosis missing?

BACKGROUND: By examining patients with testicular torsion (TT) that caused problems in medicolegal terms, the present study aims to define markers causing medical neglect or malpractice in similar conditions and perform a retrospective examination to characterize the medical aspects of patients with TT. METHODS: In this study, 53 patients who underwent orchiectomy for TT following interventions made between 2004 and 2019 in different hospitals of Turkey and had satisfactory clinical findings in their files based on medicolegal inspections were included. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was nine years. Twenty-three (43.4%) of the patients had TT on the left side, 29 (54.7%) had TT on the right side, and one (1,9%) patient had bilateral TT. It was noticed that 31 (58.5%) patients had epididymo-orchitis (EO), seven patients had (13.2%) urinary infection, five (9.4%) patients had a hydrocele, and four (7.5%) patients had renal colic, and the others had testicle contusion, gastroenteritis, inguinal hernia, and acute appendicitis as misdiagnoses. The mean time that passed between admission and TT diagnosis was detected as 59±11.2 hours. A statistically significant relation was detected between the branch of the physician who first evaluated the patients and the presence of performing scrotal examination and imaging during admission. The ratio of physical scrotal examinations by emergency service physicians was lower than with the urologists. Among the preliminary examiner allowed to be an advanced evaluation for the possibility of missing diagnosis by an independent specialist physicians, 25 (47.2%) were urologists, 22 (41.5%) were emergency service physicians, four (7.5%) were pediatricians, and two (3.8%) were radiologists. CONCLUSION: Physicians should perform the required evaluations for a suitable diagnosis and treatment by putting aside their medicolegal concerns and prevent the problems by giving priority to patient health. For the correct diagnosis and proper management of TT, it is necessary to increase the information levels of physicians, and patients should be explored urgently in the event of any clinical suspicion.

Cardiac tamponade and its medicolegal aspects: A case report.

Cardiac tamponade is a life-threatening emergency having both acute and a delayed presentation. In the latter there is a potential for medical practitioners to miss the diagnosis as happened in our case resulting in allegations of medical negligence. Before starting the autopsy in such cases, the forensic pathologist should try to obtain the complete treatment record and be ready to request ancillary investigations as required. We report a case of death due to cardiac tamponade caused by a penetrating injury to the heart. A feature of this case was the failure of our medical system to diagnose the condition and the legal system due to failure of the police to register the first information report under appropriate legal sections.

Incidental Findings in the Trauma Population: Interdisciplinary Approach and Electronic Medical Record Reminder Association with Pre-Discharge Reporting and Medicolegal Risk.

BACKGROUND: Incidental findings (IFs) are reported in 20% or more of trauma CT scans. In addition to the importance of patient disclosure, there is considerable legal pressure to avoid missed diagnoses. We reported previously that 63.5% of IFs were disclosed before discharge and with 20% were nondisclosed. We initiated a multidisciplinary systemic plan to effect predischarge disclosure by synoptic CT reports with American College of Radiology recommended follow-up, electronic medical records discharge prompts, and provider education. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational series patients from November 2019 to February 2020 were included. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS, version 21 (IBM Corp). RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventy-seven patients underwent 1 or more CT scans for the evaluation of trauma (507 were male and 370 were female). Mean age of the patients was 57 years (range 14 to 99 years) and 96% had blunt injury. In 315 patients, there were 523 IFs (1.7 per patient); the most common were lung (17.5%), kidney (13%), and liver (11%). Radiology report compliance rate was 84% (210 of 249 patients). There were 66 studies from outside facilities. Sixteen IFs were suspicious for malignancy. A total of 151 patients needed no follow-up and 148 patients needed future follow-up evaluation. Predischarge IF disclosure compliance rate was 90.1% (286 patients); 25 were post discharge. Four patients remained undisclosed. Compared with our previous report, clearer reporting and electronic medical records prompts increased predischarge disclosure from 63.5% to 90.1% (p < 0.01, chi-square test) and decreased days to notification from 29.5 (range 0 to 277) to 5.2 (range 0 to 59) (p < 0.01, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSIONS: Timely, complete disclosure of IFs improves patient outcomes and reduces medicolegal risk. Collaboration among trauma, radiology, and information technology promotes improved disclosure in trauma populations.

Medico-legal importance of necrotizing fasciitis.

Despite the rarity of necrotizing fasciitis (NF), it is a relatively common cause of death in many lawsuits. Families seek financial compensation or legal charges against those they believe to be involved in the death, usually physicians who did not identify the infection soon enough. This paper explores six cases in forensic pathology practice where NF posed a unique medico-legal dilemma.

Missed diagnosis of cancer in primary care: Insights from malpractice claims data.

BACKGROUND: In the ambulatory setting, missed cancer diagnoses are leading contributors to patient harm and malpractice risk; however, there are limited data on the malpractice case characteristics for these cases. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine key features and factors identified in missed cancer diagnosis malpractice claims filed related to primary care and evaluate predictors of clinical and claim outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed 2155 diagnostic error closed malpractice claims in outpatient general medicine. We created multivariate models to determine factors that predicted case outcomes. RESULTS: Missed cancer diagnoses represented 980 (46%) cases of primary care diagnostic errors, most commonly from lung, colorectal, prostate, or breast cancer. The majority (76%) involved errors in clinical judgment, such as a failure or delay in ordering a diagnostic test (51%) or failure or delay in obtaining a consult or referral (37%). These factors were independently associated with higher-severity patient harm. The majority of these errors were of high severity (85%). CONCLUSIONS: Malpractice claims involving missed diagnoses of cancer in primary care most often involve routine screening examinations or delays in testing or referral. Our findings suggest that more reliable closed-loop systems for diagnostic testing and referrals are crucial for preventing diagnostic errors in the ambulatory setting.