A radiologist is an inevitable defendant in a medical malpractice lawsuit involving a radiology “miss,” but any physician who fails to communicate or act on a critical radiological finding is also a potential defendant.
Maintaining patient safety and decreasing medical liability risk exposure requires the dedication and collaboration of radiologists, referring physicians, administrators, support staff and patients. Radiologists have a duty to appropriately interpret images and communicate findings; referring physicians have a duty to act upon the results of studies they order; administrators have a duty to put policies in place to ensure appropriate communication of results; support staff have the duty to know and follow communication protocols; and patients are expected to act on their physicians’ recommendations and directives.* Neglect of these duties, either by individuals or by the administration (the system), or commonly by a combination of parties, is at the root of many patient injuries and lawsuits.
A correctly interpreted radiology image and timely communication of the results can save a patient’s life. A referring physician’s responsibilities do not end when a test is ordered, and the radiologist’s responsibilities do not end when an abnormal finding is documented in a report. Radiologists can play a major role in reducing the risk of malpractice liability and increasing patient safety. They are a key link in the chain of communication that, through actions based on appropriate policies and procedures, should ensure the patient receives proper and timely treatment. Because direct communication of results will not always provide protection from malpractice liability claims, it is important to document communication efforts to the extent necessary to show diligence and to confirm that the standard of care has been met. The following case studies and best practices offer medical liability risk management recommendations for reducing these risks.
More Information About Risks Associated with Radiology Interpretation and Communication
- Closed Clam Case Study: Practice Communication Failure Leads to Delayed Diagnosis of Breast Cancer
- Closed Claim Case Study: Responding to the Discovery of Discrepancies in Imaging Interpretation
- Closed Claim Case Study: Inadequate Follow Up on Incidental Findings Leads to Delayed Diagnosis of Lung Cancer
- Article: Go Beyond Notification of Breast Density to Prevent False Negatives
- Article: Decrease Radiology Liability Risks with a Quality Improvement Program (QIP)
Reference
* ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings. 2014. (accessed 3/27/2017)
