回顾九起指控颈椎手法导致颈动脉夹层的渎职案件：没有证据表明存在因果关系。

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q3 MEDICINE, LEGAL

Journal of forensic and legal medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jflm.2024.102783

Steven Brown

{"title":"回顾九起指控颈椎手法导致颈动脉夹层的渎职案件：没有证据表明存在因果关系。","authors":"Steven Brown","doi":"10.1016/j.jflm.2024.102783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research shows no convincing evidence to support a causal link between cervical spine manipulation (CSM) and cervical artery dissection (CAD). Researchers have proposed that a belief in a causal link may have significant negative consequences such as numerous episodes of litigation. The objective of this study was to review 10 malpractice cases for evidence of unnecessary litigation due to a belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD.</div><div>A Google Scholar Case Law search from 1989 to 2024 was conducted to identify the 10 most recent English-language reports of malpractice cases involving an allegation that CSM caused CAD. Although our objective was to review 10 cases, only 9 cases were found.</div><div>In all cases, causation of CAD by CSM was not supported by the evidence. In 4 out 9 cases reviewed, causation of stroke by CSM was supported by the evidence. In all 9 cases reviewed, failure to diagnose an existing CAD was more likely than not but was not alleged.</div><div>We conclude that belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD does have negative consequences such as unnecessary litigation. In all 9 cases reviewed, allegations of failure to diagnose an existing CAD would have been more likely to result in a settlement without need for a trial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic and legal medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of nine malpractice cases with allegations of causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation: No evidence for causation\",\"authors\":\"Steven Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jflm.2024.102783\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Research shows no convincing evidence to support a causal link between cervical spine manipulation (CSM) and cervical artery dissection (CAD). Researchers have proposed that a belief in a causal link may have significant negative consequences such as numerous episodes of litigation. The objective of this study was to review 10 malpractice cases for evidence of unnecessary litigation due to a belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD.</div><div>A Google Scholar Case Law search from 1989 to 2024 was conducted to identify the 10 most recent English-language reports of malpractice cases involving an allegation that CSM caused CAD. Although our objective was to review 10 cases, only 9 cases were found.</div><div>In all cases, causation of CAD by CSM was not supported by the evidence. In 4 out 9 cases reviewed, causation of stroke by CSM was supported by the evidence. In all 9 cases reviewed, failure to diagnose an existing CAD was more likely than not but was not alleged.</div><div>We conclude that belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD does have negative consequences such as unnecessary litigation. In all 9 cases reviewed, allegations of failure to diagnose an existing CAD would have been more likely to result in a settlement without need for a trial.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic and legal medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic and legal medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1752928X24001458\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic and legal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1752928X24001458","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

研究表明，没有令人信服的证据支持颈椎手法（CSM）与颈动脉夹层（CAD）之间存在因果关系。研究人员认为，相信两者之间存在因果关系可能会产生严重的负面影响，例如引发大量诉讼。本研究的目的是回顾 10 起医疗事故案例，寻找因相信 CSM 与 CAD 之间存在因果关系而引起不必要诉讼的证据。我们在谷歌学术案例法中搜索了从 1989 年到 2024 年的 10 个最新英文报告，这些报告都涉及 CSM 导致 CAD 的指控。尽管我们的目标是审查 10 个案例，但只找到了 9 个案例。在所有案例中，CSM 导致 CAD 的指控均未得到证据支持。在审查的 9 个病例中，有 4 个病例的证据支持 CSM 导致中风。在审查的所有 9 个病例中，未能诊断出已有的 CAD 的可能性较大，但未被指控。我们的结论是，相信 CSM 与 CAD 之间存在因果关系确实会产生负面影响，如不必要的诉讼。在审查的所有 9 起案件中，如果指控未能诊断出已有的 CAD，则更有可能达成和解，而无需进行审判。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Review of nine malpractice cases with allegations of causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation: No evidence for causation

Research shows no convincing evidence to support a causal link between cervical spine manipulation (CSM) and cervical artery dissection (CAD). Researchers have proposed that a belief in a causal link may have significant negative consequences such as numerous episodes of litigation. The objective of this study was to review 10 malpractice cases for evidence of unnecessary litigation due to a belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD.

A Google Scholar Case Law search from 1989 to 2024 was conducted to identify the 10 most recent English-language reports of malpractice cases involving an allegation that CSM caused CAD. Although our objective was to review 10 cases, only 9 cases were found.

In all cases, causation of CAD by CSM was not supported by the evidence. In 4 out 9 cases reviewed, causation of stroke by CSM was supported by the evidence. In all 9 cases reviewed, failure to diagnose an existing CAD was more likely than not but was not alleged.

We conclude that belief in a causal link between CSM and CAD does have negative consequences such as unnecessary litigation. In all 9 cases reviewed, allegations of failure to diagnose an existing CAD would have been more likely to result in a settlement without need for a trial.

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

Journal of forensic and legal medicine MEDICINE, LEGAL-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

6.70%

发文量

106

审稿时长

57 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine publishes topical articles on aspects of forensic and legal medicine. Specifically the Journal supports research that explores the medical principles of care and forensic assessment of individuals, whether adult or child, in contact with the judicial system. It is a fully peer-review hybrid journal with a broad international perspective. The Journal accepts submissions of original research, review articles, and pertinent case studies, editorials, and commentaries in relevant areas of Forensic and Legal Medicine, Context of Practice, and Education and Training. The Journal adheres to strict publication ethical guidelines, and actively supports a culture of inclusive and representative publication.