Cargando…

A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field

BACKGROUND: Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical mal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Bo Young, Kim, Min Ji, Kang, So Ra, Hong, Seung Eun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27218027
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.3.278
_version_ 1782433199888007168
author Park, Bo Young
Kim, Min Ji
Kang, So Ra
Hong, Seung Eun
author_facet Park, Bo Young
Kim, Min Ji
Kang, So Ra
Hong, Seung Eun
author_sort Park, Bo Young
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical malpractice. In this study, we reviewed trends in precedents involving cosmetic surgery-related medical disputes, with the goal of helping to prevent unnecessary disputes in the future. METHODS: We conducted a search of the judgments made in South Korean courts between 2000 and 2013 that were related to the field of plastic surgery. A total of 54 judgments were analyzed, and the selected precedents were reviewed and classified according to the kind of negligence involved. RESULTS: The claim amounts ranged from under 8 million KRW (6,991 USD) to 750 million KRW (629,995 USD). The most common ratio of the judgment amount to the claim amount was 20%–30%. The judgments were classified according to the following categories: violation of the duty of explanation in 17 cases (29%), violation of the duty of care in 10 cases (17%), violation of both duties in 20 cases (35%), and no violation of duty in six cases (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Cosmetic surgery-related suits require different approaches than general malpractice suits. The Supreme Court requires plastic surgeons to determine the type, timing, methods, and scope of their treatments when considering possible results. Therefore, practitioners should be educated on their rights and responsibilities to enable them to cope with any possible medical dispute that may arise.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4876158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48761582016-05-23 A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field Park, Bo Young Kim, Min Ji Kang, So Ra Hong, Seung Eun Arch Plast Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical malpractice. In this study, we reviewed trends in precedents involving cosmetic surgery-related medical disputes, with the goal of helping to prevent unnecessary disputes in the future. METHODS: We conducted a search of the judgments made in South Korean courts between 2000 and 2013 that were related to the field of plastic surgery. A total of 54 judgments were analyzed, and the selected precedents were reviewed and classified according to the kind of negligence involved. RESULTS: The claim amounts ranged from under 8 million KRW (6,991 USD) to 750 million KRW (629,995 USD). The most common ratio of the judgment amount to the claim amount was 20%–30%. The judgments were classified according to the following categories: violation of the duty of explanation in 17 cases (29%), violation of the duty of care in 10 cases (17%), violation of both duties in 20 cases (35%), and no violation of duty in six cases (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Cosmetic surgery-related suits require different approaches than general malpractice suits. The Supreme Court requires plastic surgeons to determine the type, timing, methods, and scope of their treatments when considering possible results. Therefore, practitioners should be educated on their rights and responsibilities to enable them to cope with any possible medical dispute that may arise. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 2016-05 2016-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4876158/ /pubmed/27218027 http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.3.278 Text en Copyright © 2016 The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Park, Bo Young
Kim, Min Ji
Kang, So Ra
Hong, Seung Eun
A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title_full A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title_fullStr A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title_full_unstemmed A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title_short A Legal Analysis of the Precedents of Medical Disputes in the Cosmetic Surgery Field
title_sort legal analysis of the precedents of medical disputes in the cosmetic surgery field
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27218027
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.3.278
work_keys_str_mv AT parkboyoung alegalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT kimminji alegalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT kangsora alegalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT hongseungeun alegalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT parkboyoung legalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT kimminji legalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT kangsora legalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield
AT hongseungeun legalanalysisoftheprecedentsofmedicaldisputesinthecosmeticsurgeryfield