Resource Library

Terminating treatment of a behavioral health patient can be challenging, particularly when the patient’s behavioral well-being is dependent on the medications you are prescribing and the therapy you are providing.*

A radiologist is an inevitable defendant in a medical malpractice lawsuit involving a radiology “miss,” but any physician who fails to communicate or act on a critical radiological finding is also a potential defendant.

With many radiology cases, it is only in hindsight — with the knowledge that there is, in fact, an abnormality — that the abnormality can then be identified by comparison.¹ Consider how the outcome of this case might have been different if the second radiologist had more thoughtfully reported the discrepancies in imaging interpretation.

Some (fortunately rare) patient actions, such as a patient’s threat to harm a physician, call for immediate termination with no intermediate treatment period. Other patient actions, such as non-payment of bills or noncompliance with care recommendations, are reasons for termination but do not eliminate a physician’s duty to give a patient sufficient notice to obtain alternative medical treatment. Consider the following case, in which the physician believed the patient’s initiation of legal action against his partner justified his immediate termination of the patient relationship.*

Incidental findings of lung nodules are common and frequently missed. Many of these missed nodules are clinically irrelevant.¹ However, when a patient who is diagnosed with advanced lung cancer discovers there was an unreported incidental finding during a period when the lung cancer was treatable, a negligence claim is likely. Consider how improved communication could have affected the outcome of the following radiology case study.