Are the Judicial Reports Prepared in Emergency Services Consistent with Those Prepared in Forensic Medicine Department of a University Hospital?

Abstract

Aim:

This study aimed to analyze the judicial reports prepared in emergency services and to emphasize the importance of forensic medicine education for the physicians working at these services and the reflection of the situation to the judicial authorities.

Materials and Methods:

Reports prepared by Forensic Medicine Department of Gaziantep University Medical Faculty were accepted as the gold standard and the judicial reports of the same patients prepared in emergency services were compared retrospectively.

Results:

Most reports were found to be prepared as temporary reports. The concepts of general condition, consciousness, life-threatening clinical status and simple medical interventions were frequently mentioned, while other concepts were not mentioned. The success rate of identifying cases with and without life-threatening clinical status in emergency services was 83.49% and 85.52%, respectively. The success rate of identifying cases that could and could not be treated with simple medical intervention was 84.20% and 58.62%, respectively.

Conclusion:

It has been determined that the problems in both mentioning basic concepts and accurate report writing cannot be solved in the judicial reports organized in emergency departments. In order to protect themselves, physicians have a tendency to report the consequences more severe than they actually are. However, it should be kept in mind that this tendency may not protect the physician, but also may cause additional legal problems.