Neurology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correspondence:
Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Correspondence are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glick, T. H.
Right arrow Articles by Sato, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Glick, T. H.
Right arrow Articles by Sato, L.
Related Collections
Right arrow Harm/ risk (analysis)
Right arrow Medical care
Right arrow Malpractice
Right arrowRelated Articles
NEUROLOGY 2005;65:1284-1286
© 2005 American Academy of Neurology
Brief Communications

Neurologic patient safety: An in-depth study of malpractice claims

Thomas H. Glick, MD, Lee D. Cranberg, MD, Robert B. Hanscom, JD and Luke Sato, MD

From Harvard Medical School (Drs. Glick, Cranberg, and Sato), Boston, MA; and The Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions, Inc. (Dr. Sato and R.B. Hanscom), Cambridge, MA.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Thomas H. Glick, The Cambridge Hospital, 1493 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02139; e-mail: thomas_glick{at}hms.harvard.edu

This in-depth study of neurologic malpractice claims indicated authentic, preventable patient harm in 24 of 42 cases, enabling comparison with larger but administratively abstracted summary reports. Principal findings included the common occurrence of outpatient events, lapses in communication with patients and other providers, the need for follow-through by the consultant neurologist even when not primarily responsible, the frequency of diagnostic errors, and pitfalls associated with imaging.

Disclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Received January 14, 2005. Accepted in final form June 29, 2005.

Editorial, see page 1154


Related Articles

October 25 Highlights
Neurology 2005 65: 1148-1149. [Full Text] [PDF]

Improving patient safety: What can detailed case analysis tell us?
Lois Margaret Nora and Spencer L. Studwell
Neurology 2005 65: 1154-1155. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 NeurologyHome page
M. Rizzo and T. H. Glick
Medical errors after stroke: Preventable or inevitable?
Neurology, February 20, 2007; 68(8): 542 - 543.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
R. G. Holloway, D. Tuttle, T. Baird, and W. K. Skelton
The safety of hospital stroke care
Neurology, February 20, 2007; 68(8): 550 - 555.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
T. H. Glick, M. Rizzo, B. J. Stern, and D. M. Feinberg
Neurologists for patient safety: Where we stand, time to deliver
Neurology, December 26, 2006; 67(12): 2119 - 2123.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
L. M. Nora and S. L. Studwell
Improving patient safety: What can detailed case analysis tell us?
Neurology, October 25, 2005; 65(8): 1154 - 1155.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by AAN Enterprises, Inc.