Can liability rules keep pace with best practice?  The case of multidisciplinary cancer care

Studdert, David M

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01677.x

Topics

The main objectives of medical negligence law relate to substandard care — the direction the law will take when new treatment approaches come along is not always clear

If two heads are better than one, then four should be much better, and six should be truly formidable. The axiom is especially likely to hold true when the problem at hand is multifaceted, and each head carries knowledge that is relevant, different, and complementary. Therein lies the allure of multidis-ciplinary care (MDC) teams in cancer care.

Faculty of Law and Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC.

Correspondence: d.studdert@unimelb.edu.au

Acknowledgements:

I thank Harold Luntz and Paul Nisselle for helpful comments on an earlier draft.

1. Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA 1999; 282: 267-270.
2. Thomas EJ, Sexton JB, Lasky RE, et al. Teamwork and quality during neonatal care in the delivery room. J Perinatol 2006; 26: 163-169.
3. Chang JH, Vines E, Bertsch H, et al. The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Cancer 2001; 91: 1231-1237.
4. Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR. Management of ovarian cancer: referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer 1994; 70: 363-370.
5. Rummans TA, Clark MA, Sloan JA, et al. Impacting quality of life of patients with advanced cancer with a structured multidisciplinary intervention: a randomized control trial. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 635-642.
6. Gabel M, Hilton NE, Nathanson DS. Multidisciplinary breast cancer clinics. Do they work? Cancer 1997; 79: 2380-2384.
7. Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer 2006; 42: 2480-2491.
8. Kane B, Luz S, O’Briain DS, McDermott R. Multidisciplinary team meetings and their impact on workflow in radiology and pathology departments. BMC Med 2007; 5: 15.
9. Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol 2006; 7: 935-943.
10. Terry NP. Cyber-malpractice: legal exposure for cybermedicine. Am J Law Med 1999; 25: 327-366.
11. Kachalia A, Studdert DM. Professional liability issues in graduate medical education. JAMA 2004; 292: 1051-1056.
12. Evans AC, Zorbas HM, Keaney MA, et al. Medicolegal implications of a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care: consensus recommendations from a national workshop. Med J Aust 2008; 188: 401-404. <MJA full text>
13. Sidhom MA, Poulsen MG. Multidisciplinary care in oncology: medicolegal implications of group discussions. Lancet Oncol 2006; 7: 951-954.
14. Marsh CJ, Boult M, Wang JX, et al. National Breast Cancer Audit: the use of multidisciplinary care teams by breast surgeons in Australia and New Zealand. Med J Aust 2008; 188: 385-388. <MJA full text>

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.