Malpractice issues and contrast use

Journal of the American College of Radiology

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 344-347

  Bush Jr , William H ^a   Albright, Douglas E ^b   Sather, John S ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b PLLC   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

ACR; Contrast media; Informed consent; Malpractice; Practice guidelines; Standards

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIATRIZOATE; GADOLINIUM;

ALLERGIC REACTION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MALPRACTICE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIDE EFFECT;

EID: 84928096277     PISSN: 15461440     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.07.024     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. L. Berlin, J.W. Berlin Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL trends in 20 years of litigation AJR Am J Roentgenol 165 1995 781 788
2. R.J. Brenner, L.L. Lucey, J.J. Smith, R. Saunders Radiology and medical malpractice claims a report on the practice standards claims survey of the Physician Insurers Association of America and the American College of Radiology AJR Am J Roentgenol 171 1998 19 22
3. L. Berlin Radiologic malpractice litigation a view of the past, a gaze at the present, a glimpse of the future AJR Am J Roentgenol 181 2003 1481 1486
4. Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media of the American College of Radiology Manual on contrast media (version 5.0) 2004 American College of Radiology Reston (VA)
5. J.H. Ellis, R.H. Cohan, S.S. Sonnad, N.S. Cohan Selective use of radiologic low-osmolality contrast in the 1990s Radiology 200 1996 297 311
6. B.L. McClennan Adverse reactions to iodinated contrast media recognition and response Invest Radiol 29 Suppl 1 1994 S46 S50
7. W.H. Bush K.N. Krecke B.F. King M.A. Bettmann Radiology life support RAD-LS 1999 Hodder-Arnold London
8. S.R. Reuter An overview of informed consent for radiologists AJR Am J Roentgenol 148 1987 219 227
9. W.H. Bush Informed consent for contrast media AJR Am J Roentgenol 152 1989 867 869
10. W.H. Bush Informed consent (Q & A) AJR Am J Roentgenol 163 1994 1522 1525
11. J.M. Eisner, B.J. Casey Malpractice, informed consent, and the use of low osmolality contrast media Conn Med 52 1988 87 97
12. L. Berlin Malpractice issues in radiology 2003 American Roentgen Ray Society Leesburg (VA) p. 269-95
13. Villanueva v. Harrington, 906 P.2d 374 (Wash. App. Div. 3.1995).
14. Eppel v. Fredericks, 610 N.Y.S. 2d 254 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept., 1994).
15. Spann v. Irwin Memorial Blood Centers, 40 Cal. Rptr. 2d 360 (Cal. App. 1. Dist., 1995).
16. Keel v. St. Elizabeth Medical Center, 842 S.W.2d 860 (Ky. 1992).
17. K.D. Hopper, P.S. Houts, M.A. McCauslin Patients' attitudes toward informed consent for intravenous contrast media Invest Radiol 27 1992 362 366
18. S.R. Reuter The use of conventional vs. low-osmolar contrast agents a legal analysis AJR Am J Roentgenol 151 1988 529 531
19. American College of Radiology Practice guidelines 2003 American College of Radiology Reston (VA)
20. L. Berlin American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria and standards separate programs AJR Am J Roentgenol 176 2001 811 812
21. M.J. Guiberteau, P.A. Wilcox, S. Bjork Practice guidelines the radiology perspective J Am Coll Radiol 1 2004 92 97
22. L. Berlin Standards, guidelines, and roses AJR Am J Roentgenol 181 2003 945 950
23. L. Berlin ACR practice guidelines and technical standards (commentary) J Am Coll Radiol 1 2004 98 99
24. K.D. Hopper, H. Lambe, Y.L. Matthews Current usage of nonionic contrast Urol Radiol 14 1992 218 220
25. D.P. Utter Survey of contrast media use in southeastern U.S. hospitals Radiol Technol 68 1997 386 390
26. H.S. Thomsen Universal use of low-osmolar contrast media a European perspective Acad Radiol 1 1994 295 297