Moore, Gregory P.

Introduction: Medical documentation issues play a role in 10-20% of medical malpractice lawsuits. Inaccurate, incomplete, or generic records undermine a physician’s defense and make a plaintiff’s lawyer more likely to take on a case. Despite the frequency of documentation errors in malpractice suits, physicians receive very little education or feedback on their documentation. Our objective in this case series was to evaluate malpractice cases related to documentation to help improve physicians’ documentation and minimize their liability risks. Methods: We used Thomson Reuters Westlaw legal database to identify malpractice cases related to documentation. Common issues related to documentation and themes in the cases were identified and highlighted. Results: We classified cases into the following categories: incomplete documentation; inaccurate text; transcription errors; judgmental language; and alteration of documentation. By evaluating real cases, physicians can better understand common errors of other practitioners and avoid these in their own practice. Conclusion: Emergency physicians can reduce their liability risks by relying less on forms and templates and making a habit of documenting discussions with the patients, recording others’ involvement in patient care (chaperones, consultants, trainees, etc.), addressing others’ notes (triage staff, nurses, residents, etc.), paying attention to accuracy of transcribed or dictated information, avoiding judgmental language, and refraining from altering patient charts.

Introduction: This series reviews three cases of back pain where a highly morbid diagnosis was missed by an emergency physician and subsequently successfully litigated. Case Report: We review the clinical entities of spinal epidural abscess and cauda equina syndrome, challenging diagnoses that can be easily missed and lead to patient harm if not treated promptly. Here we offer suggestions for recognizing these conditions quickly, performing an adequate history and exam, and using documentation to support decision-making. Conclusion: When confronted with an unfortunate medical outcome, maintaining honesty is of paramount importance in medical-legal environments.

This article presents three successfully litigated medical malpractice cases involving emergency physicians and consultants. We discuss the respective case medical diagnoses, as well as established legal principles that determine in a court proceeding which provider will be liable. Specifically, we explain the legal principles of “patient physician relationship” and “affirmative act.”

We present four medicolegal cases involving medication errors, which led to patient harm and subsequent settlements or jury awards to patients. These cases each involved scenarios in which a medication was inappropriately prescribed and/or inappropriately dispensed. In such cases, it is often not obvious whether the physician or pharmacist is at fault. These cases highlight the importance of understanding the roles and responsibilities of the physician and pharmacist in medication prescription and dispensation.

We present three medicolegal cases of medical negligence settled out of court. These cases all involved patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with a suspected diagnosis of kidney stone. Highlighted are the importance of patient communication, addressing incidental findings found during a patient’s ED visit, anticipating complications, and the need for thorough documentation.

This article presents three medical-legal cases that define a physician’s duty to warn and include caveats on medical practice within the scope of the law. Some physicians may not recognize that these legal and liability requirements extend not only to physical danger, but also to infectious diseases, medical illness, and drug effects.