Ophthalmic medicolegal cases in Upper Egypt

Abstract

Purpose: To describe the pattern of ophthalmic medicolegal cases with emphasis on cases of assault, and to acquaint ophthalmologists with rules pertaining to expert testimony and medical reports. Methods:A retrospective study was carried out to review files of 247 medicolegal cases from Upper Egypt seen by the senior author in 8 years. These were classified categorically and were analyzed from various characteristics and aspects. The scheme for examination of subjects and for formulating the medicolegal report is described. Results:The different categories were assault in 224 cases (90.5%), military recruitment evasion in 8 cases (3.25%), occupational disability claims in 8 cases (3.25%) and medical malpractice in 7 cases (3%). Thirty two cases (13%) presented with alleged functional visual loss, of them 25 cases (10%) were malingering. Traumatic lens subluxation or dislocation was seen in 37 (13.5%) cases and phthisis and atrophia bulbi was the presenting sign in 55 (22.3%) cases. Twenty percent of assault cases were females. There were no differences in incidence between the provinces in Upper Egypt. Assault tools inflicted injuries are described, as well as the outcome of these cases. Claims against military recruits could not be substantiated. Occupational claims for damages were false. Alleged medical negligence cases were rejected based on accepted standards of care and not on unexpected complications. Conclusion:Medical reports have to be structured, detailed, accurate and unbiased. Data in this work are useful for statistical and planning purposes in the medicolegal domain.

Malpractice Claims in Ophthalmology: A 10-Year Review

“…10 Verdicts decided by judgment favored the doctor in most of the malpractice suits, however most of the claims resolved before judgment process in ophthalmology. [3][4][5] In a study, the compensation ratios and amounts were evaluated and it was observed that although cataract surgery was the leading cause for compensation claims, most of the glaucoma cases resulted in payment. 1 In the present study, cataract accounted for 5 out of a total of 9 compensation cases, consistent with the literature; however, we could not access the data about the paid It was stated that many ophthalmology claims could be observed with diabetic claims.…”

“…Improvements in surgical procedures could increase these risks. [4][5][6] Research on epidemiology and etiology of malpractice lawsuits has been gaining importance. The risk of an ophthalmologist taken a place in a medical condition involving malpractice claim (being reported for a malpractice claim) arises.6 In addition, every 100 obstetricians/gynecologists had 0.62-0.91 lawsuit per year, while every 100 ophthalmologists had the lowest lawsuits per year.…”

“…[1][2] In the literature, there are a limited number of studies related to medical litigation in ophthalmology. [2][3][4] Most of the malpractice claims resolved out of the court and ophthalmologists were found at fault in rare cases. [3][4][5] A review of the literature showed that cataract was the primarily reason (varies 1/4 from to 1/2) among ophthalmologic conditions involving malpractice claims.…”

“…[2][3][4] Most of the malpractice claims resolved out of the court and ophthalmologists were found at fault in rare cases. [3][4][5] A review of the literature showed that cataract was the primarily reason (varies 1/4 from to 1/2) among ophthalmologic conditions involving malpractice claims. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] In a study based on the data of the National Health Service of England for the period 1995 to 2006, ophthalmology claims accounted for 2.5% of the total malpractice claims, and cataract treatment was found as the leading cause of the claims.…”

“…[3][4][5] A review of the literature showed that cataract was the primarily reason (varies 1/4 from to 1/2) among ophthalmologic conditions involving malpractice claims. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] In a study based on the data of the National Health Service of England for the period 1995 to 2006, ophthalmology claims accounted for 2.5% of the total malpractice claims, and cataract treatment was found as the leading cause of the claims. 1 A study conducted in Spain considered that most of the claims were rebutted or resolved out of the court and found no criminal case.…”