医疗法律风险和急诊科医疗指示的使用。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Miguel A Cortel-LeBlanc, Karen Lemay, Sue Woods, Francis Bakewell, Richard Liu, Gary Garber
{"title":"医疗法律风险和急诊科医疗指示的使用。","authors":"Miguel A Cortel-LeBlanc,&nbsp;Karen Lemay,&nbsp;Sue Woods,&nbsp;Francis Bakewell,&nbsp;Richard Liu,&nbsp;Gary Garber","doi":"10.1007/s43678-023-00522-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The medico-legal risk associated with application of medical directives in the emergency department (ED) is unknown. The objective of this study was to describe and analyze factors associated with medico-legal risk in cases involving medical directives in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a descriptive analysis of closed medico-legal cases [hospital complaints, regulatory authority (i.e., College) complaints, and civil legal actions] involving emergency physicians in Canadian EDs involving medical directives (alternate terms including \"standing order\", \"nursing initiated\", \"nurse initiated\", \"nursing order\", \"triage initiated\", \"triage ordered\", \"directive\", \"ED protocol\", and \"ED's protocol\"). We used data from closed cases involving the Canadian Medical Protective Association from January 2016 until December 2021. We abstracted descriptive factors of the cases and used a framework for contributing factors classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2016 until 2021, 43,332 cases were closed and 1957 involved emergency physicians for which there was medico-legal information available for analysis. In all, 28 involved emergency physicians and medical directives. Situational awareness, team communication, and issues with clinical decision-making were the most important factors contributing to harm and medico-legal risk. Peer experts were critical of physicians not reviewing all results available for patients when initiated through a directive, misinterpreting test results, a less than thorough initial assessment, and of failing to reassess patients or re-order investigations when indicated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that the medico-legal risk exposure from the use of medical directives in the ED is low. Emergency departments may consider implementing systems to support adherence to medical directive policies, ensure physicians are alerted when medical directives are completed in a timely fashion, and leverage tools to notify the healthcare team when results have not been reviewed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55286,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medico-legal risk and use of medical directives in the emergency department.\",\"authors\":\"Miguel A Cortel-LeBlanc,&nbsp;Karen Lemay,&nbsp;Sue Woods,&nbsp;Francis Bakewell,&nbsp;Richard Liu,&nbsp;Gary Garber\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43678-023-00522-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The medico-legal risk associated with application of medical directives in the emergency department (ED) is unknown. The objective of this study was to describe and analyze factors associated with medico-legal risk in cases involving medical directives in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a descriptive analysis of closed medico-legal cases [hospital complaints, regulatory authority (i.e., College) complaints, and civil legal actions] involving emergency physicians in Canadian EDs involving medical directives (alternate terms including \\\"standing order\\\", \\\"nursing initiated\\\", \\\"nurse initiated\\\", \\\"nursing order\\\", \\\"triage initiated\\\", \\\"triage ordered\\\", \\\"directive\\\", \\\"ED protocol\\\", and \\\"ED's protocol\\\"). We used data from closed cases involving the Canadian Medical Protective Association from January 2016 until December 2021. We abstracted descriptive factors of the cases and used a framework for contributing factors classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2016 until 2021, 43,332 cases were closed and 1957 involved emergency physicians for which there was medico-legal information available for analysis. In all, 28 involved emergency physicians and medical directives. Situational awareness, team communication, and issues with clinical decision-making were the most important factors contributing to harm and medico-legal risk. Peer experts were critical of physicians not reviewing all results available for patients when initiated through a directive, misinterpreting test results, a less than thorough initial assessment, and of failing to reassess patients or re-order investigations when indicated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that the medico-legal risk exposure from the use of medical directives in the ED is low. Emergency departments may consider implementing systems to support adherence to medical directive policies, ensure physicians are alerted when medical directives are completed in a timely fashion, and leverage tools to notify the healthcare team when results have not been reviewed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55286,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00522-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00522-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:与在急诊科(ED)应用医疗指令相关的医疗法律风险是未知的。本研究的目的是描述和分析在急诊科中涉及医疗指示的病例中与医疗法律风险相关的因素。我们对涉及加拿大急诊科急诊医生的已结案医疗法律案件(医院投诉、监管机构(即大学)投诉和民事法律诉讼)进行了描述性分析,这些案件涉及医疗指令(替代术语包括“常设命令”、“护理启动”、“护士启动”、“护理命令”、“分诊启动”、“分诊命令”、“指令”、“急诊科协议”和“急诊科协议”)。我们使用了2016年1月至2021年12月期间涉及加拿大医疗保护协会的结案病例的数据。我们对病例的描述性因素进行了抽象,并使用了一个框架来进行因素分类。结果:从2016年到2021年,共结案43332例,其中1957例涉及有法医学信息可供分析的急诊医师。总共有28起案件涉及急诊医生和医疗指示。情境意识、团队沟通和临床决策问题是造成伤害和医疗法律风险的最重要因素。同行专家批评医生在根据指示启动时没有审查患者可获得的所有结果,误解测试结果,不彻底的初步评估,以及在需要时未能重新评估患者或重新安排调查。结论:我们的研究结果表明,在急诊科使用医疗指示的医疗法律风险暴露是低的。急诊部门可以考虑实施系统,以支持遵守医疗指示政策,确保医生在医疗指示及时完成时得到警报,并利用工具在未审查结果时通知医疗团队。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medico-legal risk and use of medical directives in the emergency department.

Purpose: The medico-legal risk associated with application of medical directives in the emergency department (ED) is unknown. The objective of this study was to describe and analyze factors associated with medico-legal risk in cases involving medical directives in the ED.

Methods: We conducted a descriptive analysis of closed medico-legal cases [hospital complaints, regulatory authority (i.e., College) complaints, and civil legal actions] involving emergency physicians in Canadian EDs involving medical directives (alternate terms including "standing order", "nursing initiated", "nurse initiated", "nursing order", "triage initiated", "triage ordered", "directive", "ED protocol", and "ED's protocol"). We used data from closed cases involving the Canadian Medical Protective Association from January 2016 until December 2021. We abstracted descriptive factors of the cases and used a framework for contributing factors classification.

Results: From 2016 until 2021, 43,332 cases were closed and 1957 involved emergency physicians for which there was medico-legal information available for analysis. In all, 28 involved emergency physicians and medical directives. Situational awareness, team communication, and issues with clinical decision-making were the most important factors contributing to harm and medico-legal risk. Peer experts were critical of physicians not reviewing all results available for patients when initiated through a directive, misinterpreting test results, a less than thorough initial assessment, and of failing to reassess patients or re-order investigations when indicated.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the medico-legal risk exposure from the use of medical directives in the ED is low. Emergency departments may consider implementing systems to support adherence to medical directive policies, ensure physicians are alerted when medical directives are completed in a timely fashion, and leverage tools to notify the healthcare team when results have not been reviewed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
171
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CJEM is a peer-reviewed journal owned by CAEP. CJEM is published every 2 months (January, March, May, July, September and November). CJEM presents articles of interest to emergency care providers in rural, urban or academic settings. Publishing services are provided by the Canadian Medical Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信