How does evidence based guidance influence determinations of medical negligence?

BMJ

Volumn 329, Issue 7473, 2004, Pages 1024-

  Hurwitz, Brian ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALPRACTICE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; MEDICAL CARE; NEGLIGENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; MALPRACTICE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES;

EID: 7944238013     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.329.7473.1024     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Department of Health. Drug misuse and dependence-guidelines on clinical management London: Department of Health, 1999: xv.
2. Straus SE, McAlister FA. Evidence-based medicine: a commentary on common criticisms. CMAJ 2000; 153: 837
3. Raz J,ed. Authority Oxford: Blackwell, 1984: 4, 115–141.
4. Scotttish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, British Thoracic Society. British guideline on the management of asthma. Thorax 2003; 58(suppl 1): 11–94.
5. Anonymous. Intravenous magnesium for acute asthma? Drug Ther Bull 2003; 41: 10: 79–80.
6. General Medical Council. Maintaining good medical practice London: GMC, 1998: 4.
7. Foster C. Civil procedure, trial issues and clinical guidelines. In: Tingle J, Foster C, eds. Clinical guidelines: law, policy and practice London: Cavendish, 2002: 111–120
8. Grimley Evans J. Evidence-based and evidence-biased medicine. Age Ageing 1995; 24: 461–463.
9. Horton R. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123: 965.
10. Hampton JR. Guidelines-for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men? Clin Med 2003; 3: 279–284.
11. Hucks v Cole (1960). Reported at [1994] 4 Med LR 393.
12. Texas & Pacific Railway (1903), 189 US: 468, 470.
13. Helling v Carey [1974] 519 Pacific Rep 2nd Series: 981–985
14. Albrighton v Royal Prince Alfred Hospital [1980] 2 NSWLR 542(CA), 562.
15. Merenstein D. Winners and losers. JAMA 2004; 291: 15–16.
16. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 All ER 118–128.
17. Hurwitz B. Clinical guidelines and the law: negligence, discretion and judgment. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press, 1998.
18. Cranley v Medical Board of Western Australia (Sup Ct WA) [1992] 3 Med LR 94–113.
19. Hyams AL, Brandenburg JA, Lipsitz SR, Shapiro DW, Brennan TA. Practice guidelines and malpractice litigation: a two way street. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122: 450–455.
20. McDonagh RJ, Hurwitz B. Lying in the bed we've made: reflections on some unintended consequences of clinical practice guidelines in the courts. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2003: 25: 139–143.
21. Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A, Mura G, Liberati A. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal. Lancet 2000; 355: 103–106.
22. MacNee W. Guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMJ 2004; 329: 111–120.
23. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151–1161.
24. Hurwitz B. Clinical guidelines, NICE products and legal liability? In: Miles A, Hampton JR, Hurwitz B, eds. NICE, CHI and the NHS reforms: enabling excellence or imposing control? London: Aesculapius Medical Press, 2000: 151–160.
25. Samanta A, Samanta J, Gunn M. Legal considerations of clinical guidelines: will NICE make a difference? J R Soc Med 2003; 96: 133–138.
26. Merenstein D. Evidence-based medicine on trial-reply. JAMA 2004; 291: 1698
27. Mulrow CD, Lohr K. Proof and policy from medical research evidence. J Health Polit Policy Law 2001; 26: 249–266.
28. Hall MA, Green MD, Hartz A. Evidence-based medicine on trial. JAMA 2004; 291: 1697.