These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Incomplete clinical inquiry and documentation of findings as the cause of legal problems after accidental injuries].
    Author: Hansis M.
    Journal: Versicherungsmedizin; 1993 Oct 01; 45(5):152-5. PubMed ID: 8256417.
    Abstract:
    The starting point of every expert opinion is the clinical inquiry and the description of clinical findings based on a sorrow and complete examination. Without this it can be difficult or even impossible for the expert to answer with sufficient safety the relevant question concerning the sequelae of an accident, or concerning the causal connection between trauma and damage or, as well, concerning possible medical malpractice. Based on 238 expert opinions given by the author within two years, it becomes obvious, that in 18% (41 cases) the opinion ended in an unsatisfactory manner, exclusively for incomplete description of (clinical) findings. This was on one hand because the specific question to the expert could not be answered in a sufficient and safe way, or, on the other hand, because the incomplete inquiry was the very reason for a legal dispute.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]