TY - JOUR
T1 - The role of the autopsy in medical malpractice cases, II
T2 - Controversy related to autopsy performance and reporting
AU - Bove, Kevin E.
AU - Iery, Clare
AU - Bjornsson, Johannes
AU - Bell, Micheal
AU - Buchino, John J.
AU - Collins, Kim A.
AU - Davis, Gregory J.
AU - Fierro, Marsella
AU - Geller, Stephen A.
AU - Hanzlick, Randy
AU - Havlik, Dean
AU - Hutchins, Grover M.
AU - Lee, Eun Young
AU - Nichols, Lawrence C.
AU - Parisi, Joseph
AU - Sinard, John
AU - Stocker, J. Thomas
AU - Volmar, Keith
PY - 2002/9
Y1 - 2002/9
N2 - Context. - We studied 99 appellate court records in cases of alleged medical malpractice and found no relationship between discrepant clinical and autopsy findings and outcome of litigation. Standard-of-care issues and not diagnostic accuracy were at the heart of every case. Objective. - To characterize and discuss issues related to the autopsy and/or pathologist behavior that were raised in court records of medical malpractice litigation. Design. - In 18 appellate court records, issues were raised about quality of autopsy performance and reporting or about death certification. The details of these controversies are succinctly reported here in a manner intended to be instructive to pathologists who perform autopsies in a hospital setting or on a private fee-for-service basis. Conclusion. - Autopsy reports are intended to provide objective medical information in a coherent format to the patient's medical record, to the attending physician and other concerned staff physicians, to other health care professionals, and to the families of the deceased. Inevitably, occasions arise that require legal counsel to be added to this list of parties with a legitimate interest. Our findings emphasize that incomplete, incoherent, obfuscated, or delayed reporting of autopsy findings do not meet professional standards, are unethical if intentional, and may be counterproductive.
AB - Context. - We studied 99 appellate court records in cases of alleged medical malpractice and found no relationship between discrepant clinical and autopsy findings and outcome of litigation. Standard-of-care issues and not diagnostic accuracy were at the heart of every case. Objective. - To characterize and discuss issues related to the autopsy and/or pathologist behavior that were raised in court records of medical malpractice litigation. Design. - In 18 appellate court records, issues were raised about quality of autopsy performance and reporting or about death certification. The details of these controversies are succinctly reported here in a manner intended to be instructive to pathologists who perform autopsies in a hospital setting or on a private fee-for-service basis. Conclusion. - Autopsy reports are intended to provide objective medical information in a coherent format to the patient's medical record, to the attending physician and other concerned staff physicians, to other health care professionals, and to the families of the deceased. Inevitably, occasions arise that require legal counsel to be added to this list of parties with a legitimate interest. Our findings emphasize that incomplete, incoherent, obfuscated, or delayed reporting of autopsy findings do not meet professional standards, are unethical if intentional, and may be counterproductive.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036770685&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036770685&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 12204051
AN - SCOPUS:0036770685
SN - 0003-9985
VL - 126
SP - 1032
EP - 1035
JO - Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
JF - Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
IS - 9
ER -