Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Medicolegal Issues: The Pitfalls and Pratfalls of the Bariatric Surgery Practice

  • Chapter
Minimally Invasive Bariatric Surgery

  • 1171 Accesses

Abstract

With extraordinary gains in medical technology comes the increase in medical malpractice litigation. In no area of medicine has the increase in both been more evident than in the surgical management of obesity. The increase in litigation involving bariatric surgery has been attributed to several factors, including an increase in the number of bariatric procedures performed generally (1), inexperience of the operator (2), the inherent risk of these complicated surgical procedures, and the complex nature of the patient population. The consequences of this quantum leap include negative impacts on the cost of professional liability insurance (3,4), the physician credentialing process, and the regulation and discipline of licensed health care practitioners nationwide.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 249.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Notes

  1. Mathias JM. Increase in bariatric surgery brings a surge in legal cases. OR Manager 2002;18(2).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kowalczyk L. Gastric bypass risk is linked to inexperience. Boston Globe 2004, January 4.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alt SJ. Market memo: liability insurance premiums on bariatric surgery soar. Health Care Strategic Manag 2004;22(1):1.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rice B. How high now? Med Econ 2004;81:57–59.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Twiddy D. Associated Press 2004, August 26.

    Google Scholar 

  6. For a more extensive discussion about the current medical malpractice crisis in the United States, see Studdert DM, Mello MM, Brennan TA, Medical malpractice. N Engl J Med 2003;348(23):2281, corrected in N Engl J Med 2003; 349(10):1010; and Mello MM, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. The new medical malpractice crisis. N Engl J Med 2004; 350(3):283.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mohr JC. American medical malpractice litigation in historical perspective, JAMA 2000;283(13):1731.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ibid., p. 1732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ibid., citing Mohr JC. Doctors and the Law: Medical Jurisprudence in Nineteenth-Century America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ibid.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ibid.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ibid.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ibid., p. 1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ibid., p. 1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ibid., p. 1735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ibid., p. 1735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller D. Liability for medical malpractice: issues and evidence. Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress, Vice Chair Jim Saxton (R-NJ), May 2003 (www.house.gov), accessed September 6, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Black’s Law Dictionary, citing Mathews v. Walker, 34 Ohio App.2d 128, 296 N.E.ed 569, 571.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mohr JC. American medical malpractice litigation in historical perspective. JAMA 2000;283(13):1731, citing Blackstone W. Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol 3. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1768:122.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. See, generally, Fiscina S, et al. Medical Liability. Eagan, MN: West Group, 2004:209. West Publishing, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Misreading Obesity Surgery Risk, www.rmf.harvard.edu, accessed August 7, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Furrow BR, et al. Bioethics: Health Care Law and Ethics, 3rd ed. St. Paul, MN.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pub. L. No. 104-191,110 Stat. 1936 (1996) (codified in portions of 29 U.S.C., 42 U.S.C., and 18 U.S.C.).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  27. For a more comprehensive discussion of the administrative simplification process, see Perrow et al. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act: An Overview of Administrative Simplification, XIV J. Civ. L. 231 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  28. 42 U.S.C. § 1320d et seq (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. 65 Fed. Reg. 82462 (December 28, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. 45 C.F.R. § 164.502 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. 67 Fed. Reg. 53181 (August 14, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  32. 42 U.S.C. § 1320d–3 (2002). Small health plans must have complied by April 14, 2004. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 45 C.F.R. § 164.501 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  37. 45 C.F.R. § 164.502 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 45 C.F.R. § 164.506.

    Google Scholar 

  40. 45 C.F.R. § 164.508 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  41. 45 C.F.R. § 164.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 45 C.F. R. § 164.512 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  44. 45 C.F.R. § 164.522 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45 C.F.R. § 164.524 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  46. 45 C.F.R. § 164.526 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 45 C.F.R § 164.520 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  48. 45 C.F.R. § 164.528 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  49. 42 U.S.C. § 1320d-7 (2002). “Contrary to state law” is defined as impossible to comport with both state and federal law or that the state law is a major obstacle to the implementation to the Privacy Rule. 45 C.F.R. § 160.203 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  50. 45 C.F.R. § 160.203(a) (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Guidelines for Granting Privileges in Bariatric Surgery, www.asbs.org/html/guidelines.html, accessed September 1, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Zimmerman R. Doctors’ new tool to fight lawsuits: saying “I’m sorry.” The Wall Street Journal 2004, May 18.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, Dull VT, Frankel, RM. Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA 1997;277:553–559.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ambady N, LaPlante D, Nguyen T, Rosenthal R, Chaumeton N, Levinson W. Surgeon’s tone of voice: a clue to malpractice history. Surgery 2002;132:5–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Bariatric Surgery: American College of Surgeons Recommendations for Facilities Performing Bariatric Surgery. Bull Am Coll Surg 2000;85(9).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Litigation, Goodman, Allen, and Filetti, Glen Allen, VA, USA

    Kathleen M. McCauley JD (Partner)

Authors
  1. Kathleen M. McCauley JD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Lerner College of Medicine, USA

    Philip R. Schauer MD (Professor of Surgery) (Professor of Surgery)

  2. Advanced Laparoscopic and Bariatric Surgery, Bariatric and Metabolic Institute The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Philip R. Schauer MD (Professor of Surgery) (Professor of Surgery)

  3. Department of Surgery Health Sciences Center, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA

    Bruce D. Schirmer MD (Stephen H. Watts Professor of Surgery) (Stephen H. Watts Professor of Surgery)

  4. Advanced Laparoscopic and Bariatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Stacy A. Brethauer MD (Staff Surgeon) (Staff Surgeon)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McCauley, K.M. (2007). Medicolegal Issues: The Pitfalls and Pratfalls of the Bariatric Surgery Practice. In: Schauer, P.R., Schirmer, B.D., Brethauer, S.A. (eds) Minimally Invasive Bariatric Surgery. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68062-0_60

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68062-0_60

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-68058-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-68062-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation