Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/102820 |
Resumo: | Introduction: society concern about doctors’ performance goes far back in history to the most ancient civilizations; the Code of Hammurabi (1790-1770 BC) was the first document that made reference to criminalization of medical action for damage caused to a patient. Currently, with the increasing legal aspects of Medicine, there has been an increase in indemnity demands as a consequence of judicial malpractice. Gynecology and Obstetrics are among the medical specialties with the highest number of complaints. Objective: To identify the profile of litigation of the State Court of São Paulo for civil liability in cases judged as medical errors in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Methods: the first instance processes referenced were analyzed in 16 judgments of the São Paulo State Court of Justice between June 1, 2013 and May 31, 2014, and research was carried out on the databases Medline, Pubmed and Lilacs. Results: The plaintiffs were seven (44%) patients, eight (50%) patients and spouse, the defendants were nine (56%) doctors, thirteen (81%) hospitals, eleven (69%) cases in Obstetrics, in five (31%) in Gynecology, the expert evidence found causation in four (25%) cases, no causal link in nine (56%) cases. Conclusion: the profile of litigation showed that the plaintiffs were mostly patients and spouses, the defendants were mostly hospitals, the medical specialty most involved was the Obstetrics, the expert evidence favored the defendant, the cases were dismissed most of the time, damages arbitrated in cases of conviction of the defendant vary between R$ 40,000.00 and R$ 466,500.00. |
id |
USP - 64_2771fbfcdd206e720cae4b0aa93e6347 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/102820 |
network_acronym_str |
USP - 64 |
network_name_str |
Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São PauloPerfil das demandas judiciais cíveis por erro médico em Ginecologia e Obstetrícia no Estado de São PauloErros MédicosReponsabilidade CivilGinecologiaObstetrícia.Medical ErrorsDamage LiabilityGynecologyObstetrics.Introduction: society concern about doctors’ performance goes far back in history to the most ancient civilizations; the Code of Hammurabi (1790-1770 BC) was the first document that made reference to criminalization of medical action for damage caused to a patient. Currently, with the increasing legal aspects of Medicine, there has been an increase in indemnity demands as a consequence of judicial malpractice. Gynecology and Obstetrics are among the medical specialties with the highest number of complaints. Objective: To identify the profile of litigation of the State Court of São Paulo for civil liability in cases judged as medical errors in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Methods: the first instance processes referenced were analyzed in 16 judgments of the São Paulo State Court of Justice between June 1, 2013 and May 31, 2014, and research was carried out on the databases Medline, Pubmed and Lilacs. Results: The plaintiffs were seven (44%) patients, eight (50%) patients and spouse, the defendants were nine (56%) doctors, thirteen (81%) hospitals, eleven (69%) cases in Obstetrics, in five (31%) in Gynecology, the expert evidence found causation in four (25%) cases, no causal link in nine (56%) cases. Conclusion: the profile of litigation showed that the plaintiffs were mostly patients and spouses, the defendants were mostly hospitals, the medical specialty most involved was the Obstetrics, the expert evidence favored the defendant, the cases were dismissed most of the time, damages arbitrated in cases of conviction of the defendant vary between R$ 40,000.00 and R$ 466,500.00.Introdução: a sociedade se preocupa com a atuação do médico desde as civilizações mais antigas. O Código de Hamurabi (1790-1770 a.C.) foi o primeiro documento que fez referência à penalização da atuação médica frente ao dano provocado ao paciente. Atualmente, com a crescente judicialização da Medicina, nota-se um aumento das demandas judiciais indenizatórias por erro médico. Dentre as especialidades médicas com maior número de denúncias está a Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. Objetivo: identificar o perfil das demandas judiciais do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo por responsabilidade civil em casos julgados por erro médico em Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. Material e Métodos: Análise dos processos de primeira instância referenciados em 16 acórdãos do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo entre 01 de junho de 2013 e 31 de maio de 2014 e pesquisa nos bancos de dados Medline, Pubmed e Lilacs. Resultados: os autores foram sete (44%) pacientes, oito (50%) pacientes e cônjuge, os réus foram em nove vezes (56%) os médicos, em treze (81%) o hospital, em onze (69%) na especialidade de Obstetrícia, em cinco (31%) na Ginecologia, a prova pericial verificou nexo de causalidade em quatro (25%) casos, considerou sem nexo de causalidade nove (56%) casos. Conclusão: o perfil das demandas judiciais foi: os autores na sua maioria eram pacientes e cônjuges, na maior parte dos casos o Hospital foi o réu, a especialidade médica mais acionada foi a Obstetrícia, a prova pericial favoreceu o réu, os processos foram julgados improcedentes na maioria das vezes, as indenizações arbitradas nos casos de condenação do réu variaram entre de R$ 40.000,00 e R$ 466.500,00.Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina. Departamento de Medicina Legal, Ética Médica e Medicina do Trabalho.2015-08-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionART.application/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/10282010.11606/issn.2317-2770.v20i1p15-20Saúde Ética & Justiça ; v. 20 n. 1 (2015); 15-202317-2770reponame:Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPporhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/102820/101109Copyright (c) 2015 Saúde, Ética & Justiçainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSpina, Viviam Paula LucianelliSá, Eduardo Costa2016-02-03T15:49:22Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/102820Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/indexPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/oairevistasej@fm.usp.br||2317-27701414-218Xopendoar:2016-02-03T15:49:22Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo Perfil das demandas judiciais cíveis por erro médico em Ginecologia e Obstetrícia no Estado de São Paulo |
title |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
spellingShingle |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo Spina, Viviam Paula Lucianelli Erros Médicos Reponsabilidade Civil Ginecologia Obstetrícia. Medical Errors Damage Liability Gynecology Obstetrics. |
title_short |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
title_full |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
title_fullStr |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
title_full_unstemmed |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
title_sort |
Profile of civil litigation requirements for medical error claims in Gynecology and Obstetrics in the State of São Paulo |
author |
Spina, Viviam Paula Lucianelli |
author_facet |
Spina, Viviam Paula Lucianelli Sá, Eduardo Costa |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Sá, Eduardo Costa |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Spina, Viviam Paula Lucianelli Sá, Eduardo Costa |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Erros Médicos Reponsabilidade Civil Ginecologia Obstetrícia. Medical Errors Damage Liability Gynecology Obstetrics. |
topic |
Erros Médicos Reponsabilidade Civil Ginecologia Obstetrícia. Medical Errors Damage Liability Gynecology Obstetrics. |
description |
Introduction: society concern about doctors’ performance goes far back in history to the most ancient civilizations; the Code of Hammurabi (1790-1770 BC) was the first document that made reference to criminalization of medical action for damage caused to a patient. Currently, with the increasing legal aspects of Medicine, there has been an increase in indemnity demands as a consequence of judicial malpractice. Gynecology and Obstetrics are among the medical specialties with the highest number of complaints. Objective: To identify the profile of litigation of the State Court of São Paulo for civil liability in cases judged as medical errors in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Methods: the first instance processes referenced were analyzed in 16 judgments of the São Paulo State Court of Justice between June 1, 2013 and May 31, 2014, and research was carried out on the databases Medline, Pubmed and Lilacs. Results: The plaintiffs were seven (44%) patients, eight (50%) patients and spouse, the defendants were nine (56%) doctors, thirteen (81%) hospitals, eleven (69%) cases in Obstetrics, in five (31%) in Gynecology, the expert evidence found causation in four (25%) cases, no causal link in nine (56%) cases. Conclusion: the profile of litigation showed that the plaintiffs were mostly patients and spouses, the defendants were mostly hospitals, the medical specialty most involved was the Obstetrics, the expert evidence favored the defendant, the cases were dismissed most of the time, damages arbitrated in cases of conviction of the defendant vary between R$ 40,000.00 and R$ 466,500.00. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-08-25 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion ART. |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/102820 10.11606/issn.2317-2770.v20i1p15-20 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/102820 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.11606/issn.2317-2770.v20i1p15-20 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/sej/article/view/102820/101109 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Saúde, Ética & Justiça info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Saúde, Ética & Justiça |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina. Departamento de Medicina Legal, Ética Médica e Medicina do Trabalho. |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina. Departamento de Medicina Legal, Ética Médica e Medicina do Trabalho. |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Saúde Ética & Justiça ; v. 20 n. 1 (2015); 15-20 2317-2770 reponame:Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) |
collection |
Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Saúde, Ética & Justiça (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revistasej@fm.usp.br|| |
_version_ |
1797053621477572608 |