Information Management and the Legal Aspects of Interventional Radiology

ABSTRACT

Information is the key to practicing modern medicine. A radiologist provides information to patients, to the team that works with the radiologist, and to other health-care providers. Information is defined as diminished randomness. Radiologists add value by decreasing randomness or diminishing uncertainty. They are in the business of uncertainty reduction. An understanding of the purpose of any human enterprise is a prerequisite to assessing the quality of an enterprise. This article discusses aspects of information that are relevant to improving patient care and therefore to reducing the risk of potential litigation. The discussion includes the following aspects: documentation, or the recording of information; communication, or the information from the patient; informed consent, or the information to the patient; the prudent doctor doctrine and the reasonable patient standard, or the choice of information; and off-label use, or the regulation of information.

KEYWORD

Risk management - radiology - medicine and law information - documentation - communication - informed consent - off-label use - quality patient care

REFERENCES

• 1 Fotter R, Sorantin E, Graz A. Risk Management in Radiology. Presentation at Management in Radiology, Strasbourg, France, September 11, 1999
• 2 Liang B A. Error in medicine: legal impediments to U.S. reform.  Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law . 1999;  24 28
• 3 Capstick B. Focus: risk management.  The Lawyer . 1994;  8 20
• 4 Berlin L. Y2K, Malpractice issues in radiology.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1999;  172 585-589
• 5 Bettmann M A, Holzer J F, Trombly S T. Risk management issues related to the use of contrast agents.  Radiology . 1990;  175 629-631
• 6 Craig J M C O. The Knox lecture. Radiology and the law.  Clin Radiol . 1989;  40 343-346
• 7 Emerging technologies. Address to the Department of Radiology, Rush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1999;  173 267-270
• 8 Booker M R. Physicians, malpractice, and state lines: a guide to personal jurisdiction in medical malpractice lawsuits.  Journal of Legal Medicine . 1999;  20 385-403
• 9 Bluth E I, Havrilla M, Blakeman C. Quality improvement techniques: value to improve the timeliness of preoperative chest radiographic reports. Address to the Department of Radiology, Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, Louisiana.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1993;  160 995-998
• 10 Risk Management Foundation Quarterly. Insight on Claims Data, 1998. Available at http://www.rmf.org. Accessed November 28, 1999
• 11 Schaefer M A. Overview of CRICO's Breast Cancer Claims. Forum 1998;19. Available at http://wwttpw.rmf.org/b8588html. Accessed November 28, 1999
• 12 Holman B L, Alabadi P, Silverman S G. Medical impact of unedited preliminary radiology reports.  RSNA . 1994;  191 519-520
• 13 Payne C S. A primer on patient management problems in interventional radiology.  Am J Roentgenol . 1998;  170 1169-1176
• 14 Sledge W H, Feinstein A R. A clinimetric approach to the components of the patient-physician relationship.  JAMA . 1997;  278 2043-2048
• 15 Novack D H, Schuman A L, Clark W. Calibrating the physician. Personal awareness and effective patient care. Working group on promoting physician personal awareness.  JAMA . 1997;  278 502-509
• 16 Penchansky R, Macnee C. Initiation of medical malpractice suits: a conceptualization and test.  Med Care . 1994;  32 813-831
• 17 Hall J. American Public Health Association Journal Medical Care reported study as described in Physicians Attitudes and Healing, Risk Management Foundation Cambridge Massachusetts. Available at http://www.rmf.org. Accessed November 28, 1999
• 18 Matthews J R. Practice guidelines and tort reform: the legal system confronts the technocratic wish.  Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law . 1999;  24 275-304
• 19 Glenn D M, Macario A L. New Challenges in anesthesia: new practice opportunities. Available at http://home.mdconsult.com/das/ article/body/jorg. Accessed October 20,1999.  Anesthesiology Clin North Am . 1999;  17 366-394
• 20 Furrow B R, Greaney T L, Johnson S H, Jost T S, Schwartz R L. Health Law, Cases, Materials and Problems, 3rd ed. St.  Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.; 1997
• 21 Berlin L. Informed consent.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1997;  169 15-18
• 22 vanSonnenberg E, Barton J B, Wittich G R. Radiology and the law, with an emphasis on interventional radiology.  Radiology . 1993;  187 297-303
• 23 Potchen E J, Potchen J E, Bishop L R, Snyder K A. Medical-legal issues in radiology: prevention and control.  Curr Probl Diagn Radiol . 1995;  24 141-176
• 24 Potchen E J, Bisesi M A, Sierra A E, Potchen J E. Mammography and malpractice.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1991;  156 475-480
• 25 Potchen E J, Bisesi M A. When is it malpractice to miss lung cancer on chest radiographs?.  Radiology . 1990;  175 29-32
• 26 Berlin L. The duty to disclose, malpractice issues in radiology.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1998;  171 1463-1476
• 27 Spie J B. Malpractice, risk management and quality improvement in radiology. In: Ansel G, Bettmann MA, Daufman JA, Wilkins RA, eds. Complications in Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, 3rd ed Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Science 1996: 631-648
• 28 Spring D B, Tennenhouse D J, Akin J R, Margulis A R. Radiologists and informed-consent lawsuits.  Radiology . 1985;  156 245-249
• 29 Spring D B, Tennenhouse D J. Radiology malpractice lawsuits: California jury verdicts.  Radiology . 1986;  159 811-814
• 30 Smith J J, Berlin L. Informed consent when using medical devices for indications not approved by the Food and Drug Administration.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1999;  173 879-882
• 31 Henry V. Off-label prescribing, legal implications.  Journal of Legal Medicine . 1999;  20 365-383
• 32 Smith J J, Berlin L. Off-label use of interventional medical devices.  AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1999;  173 539-549
• 33 Department of Health and Human Services. Investigational Device Exemptions Manual. Rockville, MD:DHHS; 1992