Wouter Leclercq

A decade of litigation regarding surgical informed consent in the Netherlands 133 8 Table 8.5 Patient’s allegations concerning SIC. Patient’s allegations Malpractice claims (n=245) MDB decisions (n=69) n % n % Diagnosis 4 2% 2 3% Treatment: 245 100% 69 100% - Insufficient information in general 14 6% 10 28% - Characteristics of treatment: 78 32% 19 28% * Medical technical aspects 41 17% 12 17% * Duration 4 2% 2 3% * Preparation 2 1% 0 – * Follow up 18 7% 1 1% * Time of treatment 1 0,5% 1 1% * Which doctor performs the treatment 19 8% 7 10% * Other 4 2% 1 1% - Aim of treatment 3 1% 0 – - Risks or complications of treatment 164 67% 46 67% - Alternative treatment options 33 13% 10 14% - Current health status or prognosis 9 4% 4 6% - No explicit permission was given for performing the treatment 43 18% 8 12% - Other 1 0,5% 0 – Table 8.6 Legal outcome of malpractice claims regarding SIC (n=95). Judgment Doctor Medical advisor Judicial outcome - Recognition 10 (11%) 27 (28%) 24 (25%) - Settlement 12 (13%) 12 (13%) 8 (8%) - Rejection 63 (66%) 39 (41%) 54 (57%) - N/A* 0 4 (4%) 0 - Unknown 10 (11%) 13 (14%) 9 (10%) SIC = surgical informed consent. Not applicable. Table 8.7 MDB decisions regarding SIC (n=69). Judgment Doctor Regional MDB National MDB - Recognition 1 (1%) 14 (20%) 3 (4%) - Settlement 2 (3%) – – - Rejection 61 (88%) 55 (80%) 22 (32%) - N/A* – 0 44 (64%) - Unknown 5 (7%) 0 0 SIC = surgical informed consent. Not applicable.