Journals / MN Kardiyoloji / 2009 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4

Evaluation of cardiovascular malpractice cases in Turkey

Türkiye’de kardiyovasküler malpraktis vakalarının değerlendirilmesi

Pages
247–252
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In Turkey these duties and responsibilities have been defined by law and have been described in a series of publications which have been sent to every doctor; these contain the answers to questions about good medical practice, the role of doctors in the management of health care, confidentiality and other issues.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We retrospectively reviewed the files that have been sent to The High Health Council (HHC) to uncover whether there weremalpractice cases by cardiologists and cardiovascular surgeons who have been claimed to cause injury and death because of negligence and recklessness.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Study Design and Results: We examined 1445 malpractice cases informed to the HHC by Criminal Courts between 2002 and 2007.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In Turkey these duties and responsibilities have been defined by law and have been described in a series of publications which have been sent to every doctor; these contain the answers to questions about good medical practice, the role of doctors in the management of health care, confidentiality and other issues.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kalp damar hastalıkları · Hukuk · Tıbbi uygulama hatası

Abstract

Objective: We retrospectively reviewed the files that have been sent to The High Health Council (HHC) to uncover whether there weremalpractice cases by cardiologists and cardiovascular surgeons who have been claimed to cause injury and death because of negligence and recklessness. The files that have been sent to HHC by criminal courts have also been reviewed to determine and report the defect ratio of sides. Until now, this is the first comprehensive cardiovascular malpractice study that has been performed in Turkey. Study Design and Results: We examined 1445 malpractice cases informed to the HHC by Criminal Courts between 2002 and 2007. Of these, 25 (1,8%) had cardiovascular malpractice cases (cardiology and cardiovascular surgery was 8 and 17, respectively). This study examines the 10 and 3 decisions under which Cardiovascular surgeons and cardiologist are found to be at fault, respectively. Conclusion: Cardiologists and cardiovascular surgeons, like any other group of doctors, have a primary duty of care to individual patients, but also have wider responsibilities to society in general, to their institution, and to their colleagues. In Turkey these duties and responsibilities have been defined by law and have been described in a series of publications which have been sent to every doctor; these contain the answers to questions about good medical practice, the role of doctors in the management of health care, confidentiality and other issues.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, ihmal ve dikkatsizlik sonucu yaralamaya veya ölüme sebebiyet vermek suçundan hakkında dava açılan kardiyolog ve kardiyovasküler cerrahların tıbbi uygulama hatası olup olmadığının, varsa tarafların kusur oranının tespit edilerek rapor düzenlenmesi için mahkemelerce Yüksek Sağlık Şurasına (YSŞ) gönderilen dosyalarının retrospektif olarak taranması amacını taşır. Bu, Türkiye’de şimdiye kadar yapılmış ilk kapsamlı kardiyovasküler malpraktis çalışmasıdır. Çalışma Planı ve Bulgular: İlgili mahkemelerce 2002 ve 2007 yılları arasında YSŞ’a bildirilen 1445 malpraktis vakasını inceledik. Bunların 25’i (%1.8) kardiyovasküler malpraktis vakasıydı (sırasıyla 8 kardiyoloji ve 17 kardiyovasküler cerrahi olgusu). Bu çalışmada 10’ u kardiyovasküler cerrahların ve 3’ü kardiyologların suçlu bulunduğu kararlar incelendi. Sonuç: Diğer doktorlar gibi kardiyologlar ve kardiyovasküler cerrahlar hastalarının bakımı için ilk elden sorumlu oldukları kadar toplum geneline, kurumlarına ve meslektaşlarına karşı da geniş sorumluluklar taşımaktadırlar. Türkiye’ de bu görev ve sorumluluklar her bir doktora gönderilen yayın serilerinde tanımlanmış ve kanunlarla belirlenmiştir. Bunlar uygun tıbbi yaklaşım hakkında soruların cevaplandığı, sağlık bakımının yönetimini, gizlilik ve diğer konularda doktorların rolünü içeren konuları kapsamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKÇAKOYUN, M., ÇELIK, S., PALA, S., KARGIN, R., EMİROĞLU, Y., BABUR, G., BİTİGEN, A., ESEN, A. M. (2009). Evaluation of cardiovascular malpractice cases in Turkey. MN Kardiyoloji, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4, 247–252. https://ajindex.com/articles/297946

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Maeda H, Masaki QF, Zhu B, Quan L, Tanigucjıi M. Medical practice related fatalities in forensic autopsy during the past 6 years in the southern half of Osaka City and surrounding areas. Leg Med 2003;5(l):322-4 2.Ozdemir MH, Çekin N. The structure and the duties of the High Health Council of Health. Bull Foren Med [in Turkish] 1998;3:94-7. 3.Ozdemir MH, Arslan A. High Health Council and the recommending decisions 1931-1999. 1st ed. Ankara: BMS Matbaaclk; 2000. p. 9 11 [in Turkish] 4.Liang BA, Culleri DJ. The legal system and patient safety: charting a divergent course: the relationship between malpractice litigation and human errors. Anesthesiology. 1999;91:609-611. 5.Fye WB. Cardiology's workforce shortage: implications for patient care and research. Circulation. 2004;109:813-6. 6.Bonow RO, Smith SC Jr. Cardiovascular manpower: the looming crisis. Circulation. 2004;109:817-20. 7.Kereiakes DJ, Willerson JT. The United States cardiovascular care deficit. Circulation. 2004;109:821-3. 8.Pepine CJ. President's page: counting heads, coming up short: the ratio of cardiologists to patients is becoming inadequate. J Am Coll Cardiol.2003;42:585-7. 9. SoRelle R. Cardiovascular news. Circulation. 2002; 106: e9005. 10.Robert E. Cline and Carl J. Pepine Medical Malpractice Crisis: Florida's Recent Experience Circulation 2004; 109; 2936-2938 11.Nakajima K, Keyes C, Kuroyanagi X Tatara K. Medical malpractice and legal resolution system in Japan. JAMA. 2001;285:1632-40 12.Rothschild JM, Federico FA, Gandhi TK et al. Analysis of medication-related malpractice claims: causes, preventa- bility and costs. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:2414-20. 13. Kravitz RL, Rolph JE, McGuigan K. Malpractice claims data as a quality improvement tool. I. epidemiology of error in four specialties. JAMA. 1991;266:2087-92