An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigations in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting from 1994-2019

CONCLUSIONS: Defendant verdicts were significantly associated with an alleged reason of procedural errors, an alleged reason of a failure to monitor, and congestive heart failure present in patients. The common nature of defendant verdicts, and the significantly greater occurrence of defendant verdicts during the highly-litigated winter season, suggest that surgeons frequently satisfy the legal standard of care.PMID:33794168 | DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.03.042
Source: The Annals of Thoracic Surgery - Category: Cardiovascular & Thoracic Surgery Authors: Source Type: research