PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10262976

Malpractice: a perspective for physiotherapists.

Abstract

A malpractice action--one aspect of the application of legal principles known as the law of torts--is a means whereby an injured party may seek compensation for harm caused by another party. The primary function of the law of torts is to determine whether the injurer is under a legal obligation to provide compensation to the injured for some loss due to negligent or faulty conduct. A malpractice action against a physiotherapist involves a plaintiff patient who has been injured, a defendant physiotherapist who stands accused of having caused an injury, and a determination as to whether or not the physiotherapist should bear the loss. In order to establish the liability in negligence, a plaintiff must satisfy four requirements: duty of care, breach of standard of care, causation, and damage. In this paper, a case study of malpractice action against a physiotherapist is outlined as an example of the type of arguments used by both the plaintiff and the defendant. Malpractice actions are an important means of controlling the standards of all health professionals. Because increasingly complicated technology and increased pressures on health care professionals are unlikely to reduce the number of accidents, the malpractice action will continue to provide recourse for those patients injured by lapses from the requisite standards of a profession. The threat of a malpractice action alone, however, is not enough to ensure high professional and ethical standards.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P H Osborne. Malpractice: a perspective for physiotherapists.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10262976/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Investing in Canada's nursing workforce: a comprehensive review to inform policy innovations and directions.

BACKGROUND: Health systems worldwide face persistent health workers challenges including nursing shortages, workforce strain, and inequities. In Canada, these challenges have prompted renewed national and provincial reforms to strengthen recruitment, retention, leadership, and sustainability. This paper compares nursing workforce policy directions across Canada, and international jurisdictions to inform policy and planning. METHODS: A cross-country comparative analysis of policies building on a comprehensive national funded review that included an umbrella review of 69 systematic reviews, a comparative policy review of nursing workforce strategies in five jurisdictions, and validation through national horizon-scanning and policy dialogues (n >100). Evidence was analyzed across system, organizational, and individual levels. RESULTS: At the system level, international jurisdictions demonstrate comprehensive, legislated approaches integrating data, governance, and multi-year funding have advanced key nursing strategies. In Canada, the advances show the importance of strategies to have national and provincial/territorial alignment emphasizing leadership, flexibility, and inclusion as key levers. Organizational and individual-level reforms such as mentorship, leadership development, and wellness initiatives are expanding but remain variably evaluated. Experts identified national workforce data strategies and policy integration with embedded evaluation as key enablers to inform scalability and sustainability of implemented strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Canada's nursing workforce reforms are advancing toward coordinated, equity-driven, and evidence-informed strategies. Continued investment in evaluation, leadership, and national integrated data systems along with integrating nursing workforce planning within broader intersectoral planning will consolidate these gains and position Canada as an international leader in sustainable nursing workforce policy.

Canada↗

Randomized phase III trial of single versus fractionated thoracic radiation in the palliation of patients with lung cancer (NCIC CTG SC.15).

PURPOSE: This multi-institutional Phase III randomized study compared 10 Gy single-fraction radiotherapy (RT) with 20 Gy in five fractions in the palliation of thoracic symptoms from lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The primary end point was palliation of thoracic symptoms at 1 month after RT, evaluated by a patient-completed daily diary card. Secondary end points included quality of life, toxicity, and survival. RESULTS: Most (69%) of 230 patients randomized had locally advanced disease unsuitable for curative treatment. The treatment arms were well balanced with respect to the known prognostic factors. At 1 month after RT, no difference was found in symptom control between the two arms, as judged by the daily diary scores. The changes in the scores on the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale indicated that the fractionated RT (five fractions) group had greater improvement in symptoms related to lung cancer (p = 0.009), pain (p = 0.0008), ability to carry out normal activities (p = 0.037), and better global quality of life (p = 0.039). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 scores showed that patients receiving five fractions had a greater improvement in scores with respect to pain (p = 0.04). No significant difference was found in treatment-related toxicity. Patients who received five fractions survived on average 2 months longer (p = 0.0305) than patients who received one fraction. CONCLUSION: Although the two treatment strategies provided a similar degree of palliation of thoracic symptoms, the difference in survival between the two study arms was of a clinically relevant magnitude.

Canada↗