:: Volume 25, Issue 2 (2019) ::
Sci J Forensic Med 2019, 25(2): 77-80 Back to browse issues page
Investigation of ERCP-Related Medical Complaints Referred to Forensic Medicine Department of Tehran over a Six-Year Period (2011-2016)
B. Hatami1, F. Davari *2, A.H. Mohammad Alizadeh1, A.M. Alimohammadi3
1- Gastrointestinal & Liver Diseases Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Forensic Medicine Department, Medical Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , far95779@yahoo.com
3- Tehran Forensics General Office, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (2021 Views)

Aims: Considering that ERCP is one of the most difficult and high risk activity fields of gastroenterologists, it is expected that a great percentage of complaints exist in this area. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the ERCP-related medical complaints referred to the forensic medicine department of Tehran over six years (2011-2016).
Instrument & Methods: This study was conducted by descriptive-analytical and retrospective method. First, the statistics of the recorded complaints in the forensic medicine department of Tehran province against gastroenterology subspecialist or subspecialist assistants were extracted over six years (2011-2016). Then, the ERCP-related complaint cases, that their investigation was completed were selected.
Findings: The ERCP-related complaints over the years of 2011-2016 included 35 cases, which 21 patients (60.0%) were males and 14 patients (40.0%) were females. In the 34 cases (97.1%) ERCP had accurate and scientific indication and only one case did not have an indication. In 26 (74.2%) cases after ERCP, proper diagnosis and treatment were performed. According to the primary commission, medical malpractice had been recognized in 10 cases (28.6%), and 25 cases (71.4%) had led to the acquittal of the doctor.
Conclusion: The selection of the patients based on the correct indication for ERCP operation and examination the patients after operation of the procedure in order to diagnose the probable side effects and its proper treatment have a significant role in reducing the number of complaints.

Keywords: professional negligence|medical malpractice|medical error|informed consent|medical complaint|ERCP ,
Full-Text [PDF 645 kb]   (395 Downloads)    
Article Type: Original Research | Subject: Medical Law
* Corresponding Author Address: Monitoring & Accreditation Management, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Hafez Street, Tehran, Iran. Postal Code: 1134845764
1. Nobakht Haghighi A, Zali MR, Mahdavi MS, Nourozi A. Causes of patient complaints, physician referred to the Medical Council of Tehran. J Med Counc Iran. 2000;18(4):295-303. [Persian] [Link]
2. Anderson JP, Bush, JW, Berry CC. Classifying function for health outcome and quality of life evaluation: self- versus interviewer modes. Med Care.1986;24(5):454-70. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/00005650-198605000-00008]
3. Neslin SA, Rhoads EE, Wolfson P. A model and empirical analysis of patient compliance and persistence in pharmaceuticals. Manag Sci. 2010; 24:1-36. [Link]
4. Schneider KI, Schmidtke J. Patient compliance based on genetic medicine: a literature review. J Community Genet. 2014; 5(1):31- 48. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s12687-013-0160-2]
5. Conklin LS, Bernstein C, Bartholomew L, Oliva-Hemker M. Medical malpractice in gastroenterology. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6(6):677-81. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.cgh.2008.02.047]
6. Jena AB, Seabury S, Lakdawalla D, Chandra A. Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. New Engl J Med. 2011;365:629-36. [Link] [DOI:10.1056/NEJMsa1012370]
7. Cotton PB. Analysis of 5q ERCP Lawsuits; mainly about indications. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63(3):378-82. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2005.06.046]
8. Cotton PB. ERCP is most dangerous for people who need it least. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54(4):535-6. [Link] [DOI:10.1067/mge.2001.118446]
9. Gestenberger PD. Malpractice in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1995;5(2):375-89. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S1052-5157(18)30449-5]
10. Gestenberger PD, Plumeri PA. Malpractice claims gastrointestinal endoscopy: analysis of an insurance industry data base. Gastrointest Endosc. 1993;39(2):132-8. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0016-5107(93)70052-8]
11. Hiyama T, Tanaka S, Yoshihara M, Fukuhara T, Mukai S, Chayama K. Medical malpractice ligation related to gastrointestinal endoscopy in Japan: a two- decade review of civil court cases. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(42):6857-60. [Link] [DOI:10.3748/wjg.v12.i42.6857]
12. Neale G. Clinical analysis of 100 medico legal cases. BMJ. 1993;307(6917):1483-7. [Link] [DOI:10.1136/bmj.307.6917.1483]
13. Frakes JT. The ERCP - related Law suit: "Best avoid it ".Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63(3):385-8. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2005.11.040]
14. Haghshenas M, Vahidshahi K, Amiri A, Rezaei M, Rahmani N, Pourhossen M, et al . Study the frequency of malpractice lawsuits referred to forensic medicine department and medical council, Sari, 2006-2011. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci. 2012;21(86):253-60. [Persian] [Link]
15. Rafihzade Tabaei Zavare SM, Hajmanoochehri R, Nasaji Zavare M. Frequency of failure of general physicians in referral complaints to the forensic medicine commission of Tehran from 2003 to 2005. Iran J Forensic Med. 2007;13(3):152-7. [Persian] [Link]
16. Siabani S, Alipour AA, Siabani H, Rezaei M, Daniali S. A survey of complaints against physicians reviewed at Kermanshah Medical Council 2001-2005. J Kermanshah Univ Med Sci. 2009;13(1):74-83. [Persian] [Link]
17. Sadr Momtaz N, Dehnavi H. Legal standards in the health system. Tehran: Barga; 2015. [Persian] [Link]
18. Alimohammadi AM. Laws and professional law of the medical society. 1st Edition. Tehran: Resane Takhassosi; 2018. [Link]

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 25, Issue 2 (2019) Back to browse issues page