Prevalence and outcome of litigation claims in England after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Volumn 64, Issue 13, 2010, Pages 1832-1835

  Gossage, J A ^a   Forshaw, M J ^b  

^a Specialist Registrar General Surgery   (United Kingdom)

^b GLASGOW ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BILE DUCT INJURY; BILE LEAKAGE; BILLING AND CLAIMS; BLEEDING; CHOLECYSTECTOMY; COMMON BILE DUCT; DATA ANALYSIS; FATALITY; HUMAN; INTESTINE INJURY; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LAW SUIT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

CHOLECYSTECTOMY, LAPAROSCOPIC; COMPENSATION AND REDRESS; ENGLAND; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; MALPRACTICE;

EID: 78649246917     PISSN: 13685031     EISSN: 17421241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02200.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. De Reuver PR, Wind J, Cremers JE, Busch OR, Van Gulik TM, Gouma DJ,. Litigation after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an evaluation of the Dutch arbitration system for medical malpractice. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206: 328 - 34.
2. US Department of Health and Human Services. Confronting the New Health Care Crisis: Improving Health Care Quality and Lowering Costs by Fixing our Medical Liability System. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2002.
3. Morris JA Jr, Carrillo Y, Jenkins JM, et al. Surgical adverse events, risk management, and malpractice outcome: morbidity and mortality review is not enough. Ann Surg 2003; 237: 844 - 51.
4. NHS Litigation Authority Factsheets 2 & 3 - The National Health Service Litigation Authority Report and Accounts (2008); Printed by the UK Stationary office, on behalf of the controller of HMSO, ID 5797845 07/08
5. De Reuver PR, Grossmann I, Busch OR, Obertop H, Van Gulik TM, Gouma DJ,. Referral pattern and timing of repair are risk factors for complications after reconstructive surgery for bile duct injury. Ann Surg 2007; 245: 763 - 70.
6. Go PM, Schol F, Gouma DJ,. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in The Netherlands. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 1180 - 3.
7. Kern KA,. Malpractice litigation involving laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cost, cause, and consequences. Arch Surg 1997; 132: 392 - 7 discussion 397-8.
8. Chandler JG, Randle Voles C, Floore TL, Bartholomew LA,. Litigious consequences of open and laparoscopic biliary surgical mishaps. J Gastrointest Surg 1997; 1: 138 - 45.
9. Stewart L, Way LW,. Bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: factors that influence the results of treatment. Arch Surg 1995; 130: 1123 - 9.
10. Schol FPG, Go PMNYH, Gouma DJ,. Outcome of 49 repairs of bile duct injuries after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 1995; 19: 753 - 7.
11. McLean TR,. Risk management observations from litigation involving laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 2006; 141: 643 - 8.
12. Huang ZQ, Huang XQ,. Changing patterns of traumatic bile duct injuries: a review of forty years experience. World J Gastroenterol 2002; 8: 5 - 12.
13. Walsh RM, Vogt DP, Ponsky JL, Brown N, Mascha E, Henderson JM,. Management of failed biliary repairs for major bile duct injuries after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 199: 192 - 7.
14. Flum DR, Cheadle A, Prela C, Dellinger EP, Chan L,. Bile duct injury during cholecystectomy and survival in medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 2003; 290: 2168 - 73.
15. Chen AM, Leff DR, Simpson J, Chadwick SJD, McDonald PJ,. Variations in consenting practice for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006; 88: 482 - 5.