ArticleBJU international2022
Litigation in the management of urinary stone disease.
Article in BJU international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo present common technical and non-technical issues leading to medicolegal litigation, illustrated by a series of 54 cases, with the aim of using these examples to prevent harm to patients and to prevent surgeons from having to experience the stress of litigation.
methodsA series of 78 medicolegal litigation cases reviewed by a single expert witness over 13 years from 2008 to 2021 was analysed by two reviewers. Twenty-nine cases were identified as having a non-technical learning point and 25 were identified as having a technical learning point. These are discussed using illustrative examples and the steps that could have avoided these issues are considered.
resultsAll major issues and themes are illustrated with cases demonstrating the errors that lead to litigation and the often-simple steps that can be taken to avoid them. Out of 29 non-technical issues, 13 involved consent issues (45%), eight involved delays in treatment (28%) and eight involved failure to provide adequate safeguarding advice (28%). Out of 25 technical issues, 13 cases involved intra-operative problems (52%) including nine ureteric injuries, eight involved errors or omissions in the immediate preoperative period (32%) and four resulted from decisions around emergency decompression of the obstructed infected kidney. These emergency cases featured complications of amputation (two out of four) and death (one out of four). These decisions are complex and there are many subtleties to these cases, which are discussed in detail.
conclusionWe hope that this case series highlights the potentially catastrophic outcomes of even small errors of judgement, and allows careful stone surgeons to learn from the experiences of those unfortunate others without having to encounter these situations themselves.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.