Cases of otology malpractice appeals to the Council of Forensic Medicine: An evaluation of the past two decades

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorid0000-0003-0606-864X
dc.authorid0000-0002-3887-4569
dc.contributor.authorEvcimik, Muhammed Fatih
dc.contributor.authorAslıyüksek, Hızır
dc.contributor.authorOrhan, Zeynel Abidin
dc.contributor.authorCırık, Ahmet Adnan
dc.contributor.authorBayazıt, Yıldırım Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorOrhan, Kadir Serkan
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-16T06:05:26Z
dc.date.available2020-07-16T06:05:26Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Ana Bilim Dalı
dc.description.abstractCases of otology malpractice appeals to the Council of Forensic Medicine: an evaluation of the past two decades. Introduction: The present study aims to demonstrate the profile of clinical malpractice by evaluating otologyrelated cases, which have been subject to legal action, to determine avoidable errors and identify actions necessary for safe clinical practices.Method: Files of otology-related malpractice appeals to the Council of Forensic Medicine between 1995 and 2015 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients' demographics, complications subject to legal action, performed operations and medical practices, medical centres where the practices took place, and whether physician error was involved, as detailed in these files, were studied.Results: A total of 44 otology-related cases was included in the study. Thirty-two (72.7%) of these were due to surgical errors and 12 (27.3%) were due to outpatient clinic services. When examined by year, there was a significant increase during the latter years. Hearing loss was the main reason for complaint with 19 cases (43.2%), followed by facial paralysis with 17 cases (38.6%), and less commonly by late diagnosis, disfigurement and tinnitus. Second-line healthcare institutions were the source of 75% of the cases. Lawsuit rationales involved under-treatment or wrong treatment, rather than wrong or late diagnosis. Three fated cases were subject to lawsuits. According to the evaluation of the files from the Council of Forensic Medicine, there were faults in eight files, while 36 files involved no faults.Conclusion: The most common causes for law suits were hearing loss and facial paralysis. Most of the lawsuits were associated with surgical cases. The retrospective analysis of otology-related malpractice files is an important step in minimizing physician errors.
dc.identifier.citationEvcimik, M. F., Aslıyüksek, H., Orhan, Z. A., Cırık, A. A., Bayazıt, Y. A. ve Orhan, K. S. (2017). Cases of otology malpractice appeals to the Council of Forensic Medicine: An evaluation of the past two decades. B-ENT, 13(4), 259-264.
dc.identifier.endpage264
dc.identifier.issn1781-782X
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage259
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/5498
dc.identifier.volume13
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherRoyal Belgian Society for Ear
dc.relation.ispartofB-ENTen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
dc.subjectOtology
dc.subjectMalpractice
dc.subjectMedical Error
dc.subjectForensic Medicine
dc.titleCases of otology malpractice appeals to the Council of Forensic Medicine: An evaluation of the past two decades
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim Yok
İsim:
Evcimik-Muhammed-2017.pdf
Boyut:
374.97 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

Makale Koleksiyonu
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu