Medical Legal Aspects of Regional Anesthesia: Legal Perspective

Chapter

Key Points

  • Understanding of regional anesthesia malpractice claims from a lawyer’s perspective is helpful in appreciating the legal process involved, including requirements for record-keeping, documentation of consent, and cases of practicing outside of guidelines.

  • Legal systems and definitions of malpractice vary around the world; however, for most jurisdictions, a successful claim requires that patient be able to establish that the anesthesiologist owed them a duty of care and that this duty was breached, resulting in injury.

  • Important legal issues can arise from lack of documentation of procedures, incomplete records, absence of or incomplete patient consent, issues with handover of care, and failure to adhere to recommended guidelines and practice standards.

Keywords

Regional anesthesia Litigation Malpractice Consent Guidelines 

References

  1. 1.
    Cook TM, Bland L, Mihai R, Scott S. Litigation related to anaesthesia: an analysis of claims against the NHS in England 1995–2007. Anaesthesia. 2009;64:706–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kluger MT, Townend K, Laidlaw T. Job satisfaction, stress and burnout in Australian specialist anaesthetists. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:339–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brennan TA, Sox CM, Burstin HR. Relation between negligent adverse events and the outcomes of medical-malpractice litigation. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1963–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, Hebert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Newhouse JP, Weiler PC, Hiatt HH. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. 1991. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13:145–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Macdonald R. Problems with regional anaesthesia: hazards or negligence? Br J Anaesth. 1994;73:64–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    White SM, Baldwin TJ. Consent for anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:760–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoffman AC, Sanbar SS. Spoliation: record retention, destruction, and alteration. In: Sanbar SS, editor. The medical malpractice survival handbook. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bernards CM, Hadzic A, Suresh S, Neal JM. Regional anesthesia in anesthetized or heavily sedated patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33:449–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fearnley RA, Bell MD, Bodenham AR. Status of national guidelines in dictating individual clinical practice and defining negligence. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108:557–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Charles SC. Coping with a medical malpractice suit. West J Med. 2001;174:55–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sanbar SS, Firestone MH. Medical malpractice stress syndrome. In: American College of Legal Medicine, editor. The medical malpractice survival handbook. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 9–15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of AnaesthesiaWaikato HospitalHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations