Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Ophthalmic malpractice lawsuits with large monetary awards

M F Kraushar¹, J H Robb

¹Department of Ophthalmology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark 07090, USA.

Archives of Ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)

|March 1, 1996

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Ocular explosion after peribulbar anesthesia.

Ophthalmology·1997

Same author

Prevention of accidental intraocular injection following inadvertent needle perforation of the eyeball.

Ophthalmic surgery and lasers·1996

Same author

Anaphylactic reaction to intravitreal cefazolin.

Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.)·1994

Same author

Recognizing and managing the litigious patient.

Survey of ophthalmology·1992

Same author

Miotics and retinal detachment.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·1991

Same author

Miotics and retinal detachment: upgrading the community standard.

Survey of ophthalmology·1991

Same journal

The economics of the initial preventive physical examination in medicare-reply.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

Same journal

Modification of silicone oil retention sutures in aphakic eyes with iris loss-reply;.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

Same journal

December 2011 archives web quiz winner.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

Same journal

Angle involvement and glaucoma in patients with biopsy-proven iris melanoma: a response-reply.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

Same journal

About this journal.

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

Same journal

In memoriam: goodwin m. Breinin, MD (1918-2011).

Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·2013

See all related articles

Major ophthalmology malpractice claims often involve severe vision loss, with delayed diagnosis or treatment of retinal detachment being a key issue. Prompt patient care and accurate documentation are crucial for preventing costly legal settlements.

Area of Science:

Ophthalmology
Medical Malpractice Law
Patient Safety

Background:

A significant portion of ophthalmology malpractice claims result in substantial patient indemnification.
These claims frequently involve severe visual impairment, including legal blindness.

Purpose of the Study:

To analyze high-value malpractice claims against ophthalmologists to identify key risk factors for prevention.
To understand the common causes and contributing factors in severe ophthalmology malpractice cases.

Main Methods:

Analysis of closed malpractice claims against ophthalmologists with patient indemnification of at least $250,000.
Review of claim details including timing of alleged malpractice, patient conditions, and settlement factors.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

Cataract treatment was the most common reason for claims.
Failure or delay in diagnosing or treating retinal detachment was the most frequent complication (25%).
Alleged malpractice often occurred early in the physician-patient relationship (within 1 month or on initial encounter).

Conclusions:

Inadequate documentation, informed consent issues, and delayed patient care were significant factors influencing settlements.
Preventing severe patient injury and legal blindness requires addressing diagnostic delays, particularly for retinal detachment, and improving prompt patient management.