Teleradiology Malpractice

In the new tech era, the teleradiology is ruling the diagnostic space with quickly accessible radiology skills even if at distance. This is badly needed in remote diagnostic MRI or CT set-ups. However, TeleradiologyHub.com, a leading tele reporting portal confirms there are malpractices possible which needs to be avoided by the facilities.

Technology has produced a new level of interactions between the stakeholders in diagnostic space. From patient, referral doctors to diagnostic facilities and radiologist everyone is asking for faster efficient and economic MRI or CT report.

Teleradiology is of two kinds, near site or far from site. The near site is where MRI or CT scan images are transmitted from the diagnostic facility to the cabin of radiologist or to this home generally after working hours. Whereas far site teleradiology is that MRI or CT scan images will be transmitted to a commercial teleradiology/Storage/IT company that may then again arrange online radiologists who are no way near to Diagnostic facilities may be in different geographical locations or areas or countries and render a preliminary report of MRI or CT or Xray or PET test undertaken.

In the latter scenario, radiologists who are located in countries other than original country of diagnostics. They are permitted to write the radiology reports because Medicare does not allow payment for final radiologic interpretations made outside the country. In these cases, hospital-based radiologists overread the images the following day and render the final interpretation.

"The radiologist who reports from distance away from the clinical settings without much of clinical information. Such reporting can be the source of potential medical malpractice", confirms Dr Kabra from TeleradiologyHub, a leading portal for second opinion of MRI and CT scans.

The tele reporting could be done by internal radiologist hired by hospital directly or outside-contracted radiologists, preliminary interpretations are usually feed or prompt other surgical or emergency departments for medical care. These interpretations are frequently made with limited clinical history and without the benefit of any previous studies with which to compare. If it later turns out that the interpretation was erroneous and the patient was injured as a result—for example, if the patient suffered irreversible brain damage due to a missed subarachnoid hemorrhage from a ruptured cerebral aneurysm—a claim of medical malpractice may well be filed, and the radiologist who interpreted the original study may be sued. Even the overreading radiologist, who may have corrected the error the next day but too late to mitigate the patient's injury, may be sued as well because of the legal theory known as vicarious liability.

Ref: ( David A. Koff, Thomas E. Doyle, in Encyclopedia of Biomedical Engineering, 2019)