A 12-year follow-up study of malpractice claims against radiologists in Italy;Dodici anni di osservazioni sul contenzioso assicurativo radiologico

Radiologia Medica

Volumn 111, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 1009-1022

  Fileni, A ^a   Magnavita, N ^b  

^a INRCA   (Italy)

^b CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

Clinical risk management; Error; Liability; Malpractice; Radiology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INSURANCE; ITALY; MALPRACTICE; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGIST; RISK FACTOR;

FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; INSURANCE, LIABILITY; ITALY; LIABILITY, LEGAL; MALPRACTICE; MEDICAL ERRORS; RADIOLOGY;

EID: 33750292082     PISSN: 00338362     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-006-0099-z     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Gozzi G, Martinoli C, Conti GM et al (2005) Laboratories di radiologia - Modulo di senologia: errori più frequenti. Radiol Med 109:268-279
2. Pescarini L, Inches I (2006) Systematic approach to human error in radiology. Radiol Med DOI 10.1007/s11547-006-0026-3 (e-pub 3 March 2006)
3. Papagni L, Fierro D ( 1992) La responsabilità del radiologo nella refertazione. I Quaderni del Radiologo, n. 1, APC SIRM, Omicron, Genova
4. Fileni A, Magnavita N (1996) Analisi delle denunce assicurative di responsabilità civile nella radiologia. Primi dati italiani. Radiol Med 91:275-278
5. Fileni A, Magnavita N (1997) Denunce di responsabilità civile contro i radiologi in Italia. Andamento del fenomeno nel triennio 1993-1995. Radiol Med 93:284-286
6. Fileni A, Magnavita N (1998) Denunce di responsabilità civile contro i radiologi. Analisi del quinquennio 1993-1997. Radiol Med 195:506-510
7. Fileni A. Magnavita N (2000) Denunce contro i Radiologi in Italia. Radiol Med 99:182-187
8. Brenner RJ (1993) Mammography and malpractice litigation: current status, lessons and admonitions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:931-935
9. Berlin L, Berlin JW (1995) Malpractice and radiologists in Cook county, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165:781-788
10. Elmore JG, Taplin SH, Barlow WE et al (2005) Does litigation influence medical practice? The influence of community radiologists' medical malpractice perceptions and experience on screening mammography. Radiology 236:37-46
11. Studdert DM, Mello MM, Sage WM et al (2005) Defensive Medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment. JAMA 293:2609-2617
12. Kachalia A, Choudhry NK, Studdert DM (2005) Physician response to the malpractice crisis: from defense to offense. J Law Med Ethics 33:416-428
13. Kern KA (1992) Causes of breast cancer malpractice litigation. A 20-year civil court review. Arch Surg 127:542-547
14. Mitnick JS, Vazquez MF, Plesser KP, Roses DF (1993) Breast cancer malpractice litigation in New York State. Radiology 189:673-676
15. Reintgen D, Cox G, Greenberg H et al (1993) The medical implications of following mammographic breast masses. Am Surg 59:99-105
16. Ministero della Salute (2004) Risk Management in Sanità. Il problema degli errori. Allegato 4: Rischio nelle attività diagnostiche. Ministero della Salute, Roma
17. Fitzgerald R (2001) Error in radiology. Clin. Rad 56:938-946
18. Rothemberg BM, Korn A (2005) The opportunities and challenges posed by the rapid growth of diagnostic imaging. JACR 2:407-410
19. Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA et al (2004) Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:1840-1850
20. Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R et al (2005) Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen 12:103-106
21. Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Risso G et al (2005) The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 12:125-127
22. Cornford EJ, Evans AJ, James JJ et al (2005) The pathological and radiological features of screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed following arbitration of discordant double reading opinions. Clin Radiol 60:1182-1187
23. Brenner RJ (1995) Interventional procedures of the breast: medicolegal considerations. Radiology 195:611-615
24. Chew FS, O'Reilly MA, Schuckenbrock CM (1996) Medicolegal aspects of breast cancer in U.S. federal medical facilities: analysis of 80 claims. Mil Med 161:329-333
25. Andrieu-de-Levis P, Caille JM (1995) Responsabilite et evolution de l'imagerie medicale. J Radiol 76:329-337
26. Berlin R (2005) Errors of omission. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:1416-1421
27. Mavroforou A, Giannoukas A, Mavrophoros D, Michaelodimitrakis E (2003) Physician's liability in interventional radiology and endovascular therapy. Eur J Radiol 46:240-243
28. Kaiser PC (2006) Harmful errors in radiology suite top national database. Diagnostic Imaging Online. Disponibile al seguente indirizzo: http://www.dimag.com/showNews.jhtml?articleID=177101651
29. Mozumdar BC, Jones G (2003) Medicolegal issues in radiological consultation. Radiol Manage 25:40-43