Commentary
Concise analysis of recent developments in radiology and medicolegal practice.
Short commentary on cases, professional standards and clinical issues with direct relevance to radiologists and legal practitioners.
Each article identifies the radiological issue, the applicable legal or professional principle and its practical significance.
Showing all 12 articles
Newest first. Each article is a concise analysis rather than a substitute for the judgment, guidance or primary source.
Whether a GP informed a patient that a chest radiograph had been requested, whether he would have attended if properly informed, and whether missed follow-up amounted to contributory negligence.
Whether a movement-degraded lumbar MRI was negligently reported as showing mild stenosis, and whether the imaging demonstrated cauda equina compression requiring urgent surgery.
Whether radiologists negligently failed to identify possible developmental dysplasia of the hips on neonatal abdominal radiographs obtained for an unrelated clinical indication.
Whether the clinical presentation required emergency MRI for suspected cauda equina syndrome, and whether the interval before surgery caused additional neurological injury.
Whether an incorrect radiological diagnosis and the decision not to biopsy an enlarging abdominal mass amounted to clinical negligence.
Whether a midwife was negligent in administering a second dose of Prostin during labour induction, examining the application of Bolam and Bolitho principles, clinical guidelines, risk assessment and the range of reasonable professional responses.
Whether benign clinical examination, mammography and ultrasound findings required core biopsy of a palpable breast lump, and whether biopsy would probably have detected an occult 3 mm carcinoma.
Judicial review of planning for a scrapyard boundary wall — examining how contaminated land regulation, environmental law and planning intersect with clinical negligence and duty of care.
Whether a doctor advised a patient to obtain follow-up after a markedly raised blood-pressure reading, whether untreated hypertension caused a later fatal stroke, and whether patient non-attendance amounted to contributory negligence.
High Court decision addressing whether post-caesarean wound dehiscence permitted an inference of negligent suturing, and examining the burden of proof, Bolam principles and the limits of expert reconstruction of surgical events.
Court of Appeal decision on negligent cervical-smear screening, addressing the application of Bolam to cytoscreeners, the distinction between factual findings and professional judgment, and liability for reporting abnormal smears as negative.
Leading House of Lords authority refining the Bolam test by confirming that courts are not bound to accept professional opinion unless it is capable of withstanding logical analysis.
