Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Litigation suits in otorhinolaryngology — Areas of concern

  • Clinical Report
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The factors that separate an otolaryngology related law suit from others are manifold. The definition of standard of care, the patient’s expectation of a surgical outcome and the psychological consequence that results from the surgical complications are unique to this specially. As this specially deals with one of the most sensitive part of a human body, patient’s expectations of any treatment is bound to differ from that of the doctor. Unlike other fields, the definition of standard of care is constantly evolving due to continuous introduction and modification of the techniques and instruments. Statistics shows that the most common allegation in law suits relating to this branch is inadequate consent for the proposed treatment followed by wrong techniques used for operation. Negligence in postoperative care, failure to diagnose early and faulty maintenance of medical words are the other major areas that concern a doctor in a court room. The present article aims at reviewing some major problem areas and addressing the legal aspects concerning those areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference

  1. Rao SVJ.Health care, ethics and the law. In,Medical Ethics, 1stedition.Bangalore, Legalaxy Publications, 2004;7–19.

    Google Scholar 

  2. King RC.Liability of otolaryngologists. In,Sanbar SS, Firestone MH, Buckner F (ed).Legal Medicine, 6thedition.Philadelphia, Mosby, 2004;448–455.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lynn-Macrae AG, Lynn-Macrae RA, Emani J.Medicolegal analysis of injury during endoscopic sinus surgery.Laryngoscope.2004;114(8):1492–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lydiatt DD.Litigation and the lingual nerve.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61(2):197–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lydiatt DD.Medical malpractice and facial nerve paralysis.Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129(12):1355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Haddow K, Crowther JA.Consent—who, what, where, when? Health Bull (Edinb). 2000;58(3):218–20.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Houghton DJ, Williams S, Bennett JD, Back G, Jones AS.Informed consent: patients’ and junior doctors’ perceptions of the consent procedure.Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1997;22(6):515–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. O’Dwyer HM, Lyon SM, Fotheringham T, Lee MJ.Informed consent for interventional radiology procedures: a survey detailing current European practice.Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2003;26(5):428–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lydiatt DD.Cancer of the oral cavity and medical malpractice.Laryngoscope.2002;112(5):816–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bateman ND, Carney AS, Gibbin KP.An audit of the quality of operation notes in an otolaryngology unit.J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1999;44(2):94–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bastia BK, Kuruvilla A, Saralaya KM.Validity of consent — A review of statutes.Indian J Med Sci 2005;59:74–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gupta RL.The perioperative Patient Care. In,The Medicolegal Aspects of Surgery, 1stedition.New Delhi, Jaypee Brothers, 1999;31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Published in part III, section 4 of the Gazzette of India, dated 6th April, 2002.

  14. Driscoll P, Bulstrode CJK.Preparing a patient for surgery. In,Russell RCG, Williams NS, Bulstrode CJK (ed).Bailey and Love’s Short Practice of Surgery, 24thedition.London, Arnold, 2004;29–41.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lewitz BB, Casciato DA.Principle of oncology. In,Casciato DA (ed).Manual of Clinical Oncology, 5thedition.Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004:3–27.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Forensic Medicine, SDM College of Medical Sciences, Dhrwad-580009. Karnataka

    Binaya Kumar Bastia

Authors
  1. Binaya Kumar Bastia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Binaya Kumar Bastia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bastia, B.K. Litigation suits in otorhinolaryngology — Areas of concern. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 58, 370–373 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03049598

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03049598

Keywords

Search

Navigation