Introduction: In recent decades, the number of professional liability disputes has in-creased, especially in the civil sector. In these liability assessments, medico-legal experts have be-come the linchpin. Law No. 24/2017, concerning professional liability in Italy, requires that guidelines and best practices be established to identify the necessary elements for writing expert reports in the legal sector. Materials and Methods: The authors have created a numerical indicator to be applied to 150 legal expert reports on professional liability, enabling them to evaluate the methodological quality of those reports. The results are then compared with the outcome of the legal proceedings in order to establish the suitability of this quality index for evaluating the work of medico-legal experts. Results: Of the 150 reports considered, 14 were scored inadequate, 75 adequate and 31 good. These inadequate (according to the indicator) reports presented a higher probability of being scored inadequate in court proceedings, compared to the risk of inadequacy of all the reports; OR 4.6 (95% CI 1.25-16.90). This probability significantly increased on comparing the inadequate reports with the adequate; OR 5.6 (95% CI 1.28-24.41), and the inadequate with the good; OR 7.73 (95% CI 1.50-39.87). Discussion: Application of the proposed indicator is simple and produces a high-quality result, thus ensuring an accurate and tenable appraisal of methodological quality. Conclusion: The indicator proposed serves as a useful starting point for creating the necessary methodological standards for medico-legal experts in the field of professional liability as recom-mended by Law No. 24/2017.

Proposal for the application of a quality indicator to medico-legal consultations in the field of medical liability

Bolcato, Matteo;
2021-01-01

Abstract

Introduction: In recent decades, the number of professional liability disputes has in-creased, especially in the civil sector. In these liability assessments, medico-legal experts have be-come the linchpin. Law No. 24/2017, concerning professional liability in Italy, requires that guidelines and best practices be established to identify the necessary elements for writing expert reports in the legal sector. Materials and Methods: The authors have created a numerical indicator to be applied to 150 legal expert reports on professional liability, enabling them to evaluate the methodological quality of those reports. The results are then compared with the outcome of the legal proceedings in order to establish the suitability of this quality index for evaluating the work of medico-legal experts. Results: Of the 150 reports considered, 14 were scored inadequate, 75 adequate and 31 good. These inadequate (according to the indicator) reports presented a higher probability of being scored inadequate in court proceedings, compared to the risk of inadequacy of all the reports; OR 4.6 (95% CI 1.25-16.90). This probability significantly increased on comparing the inadequate reports with the adequate; OR 5.6 (95% CI 1.28-24.41), and the inadequate with the good; OR 7.73 (95% CI 1.50-39.87). Discussion: Application of the proposed indicator is simple and produces a high-quality result, thus ensuring an accurate and tenable appraisal of methodological quality. Conclusion: The indicator proposed serves as a useful starting point for creating the necessary methodological standards for medico-legal experts in the field of professional liability as recom-mended by Law No. 24/2017.
2021
Clinical risk management
Guidelines
Legal medicine
Medical liability
Medico-legal evaluation
Quality indicator
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14245/5757
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
social impact