Archivos espanoles de urologia · 2025
Medical Malpractice in Urology: Analysis of Supreme Court Decisions in Turkey (2012-2022).
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Şimşek Alper, Başer Aykut
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In recent years, claims of medical malpractice have increased. Doctors from the surgical branch frequently appear in medical malpractice reports. However, research in the national medical literature regarding the examination of court cases reflected in the higher judiciary in the field of urology appears to be lacking. This study aims to identify situations that give rise to malpractice claims in urology, specify errors and professionally risky situations and aid in the elimination of these deficiencies.
METHODS: We examined the Supreme Court appeal decisions related to urology malpractice cases resolved between 2012 and 2022, using the keywords "urology" and "urologist" on the official website of the Republic of Turkey Supreme Court.
RESULTS: We examined 37 Supreme Court decisions. We discovered that 12 cases involved negligent homicide, 9 cases involved negligent injury, 8 cases involved incorrect procedures, 4 cases involved lack of due care, 2 cases involved misuse of authority and 2 cases did not specify the type of fault.
CONCLUSIONS: We shed light on the instances in which urology specialists face allegations of malpractice. To avoid and minimise medical errors that may result in death or disability, specialists must be prepared for every situation before surgery and follow up the patients appropriately.
METHODS: We examined the Supreme Court appeal decisions related to urology malpractice cases resolved between 2012 and 2022, using the keywords "urology" and "urologist" on the official website of the Republic of Turkey Supreme Court.
RESULTS: We examined 37 Supreme Court decisions. We discovered that 12 cases involved negligent homicide, 9 cases involved negligent injury, 8 cases involved incorrect procedures, 4 cases involved lack of due care, 2 cases involved misuse of authority and 2 cases did not specify the type of fault.
CONCLUSIONS: We shed light on the instances in which urology specialists face allegations of malpractice. To avoid and minimise medical errors that may result in death or disability, specialists must be prepared for every situation before surgery and follow up the patients appropriately.