How the digital revolution is affecting business and everyday life


The above factors may in different ways shape the professional responsibility of physicians in specific cases. Failure to comply with the desired recovery effect of the patient, who is nevertheless cared for by the medical staff, may not be the result of a medical error, but a failure to ensure adequate professional capacity. This negative effect can also be the result of various complications or so-called medical interruptions that occur despite diligence and ensuring the ability to properly perform the work of medical professionals.

In addition, the actions taken by medical professionals are often urgent and are based on data from the patient’s medical history, sometimes without the possibility or need for an examination; What happens if the information provided by the patient or his family is incorrect for any reason (incomplete, incorrect, false, etc.)? Moreover, it seems that an extremely harsh global approach to medical errors or their widespread reproach in some cases can lead to situations where a medical professional does not perform certain medical actions due to fear of various aspects of responsibility.

A guilty medical error is an objective concept; this is how the actions and inactions of doctors or other medical staff are qualified as a result of not exercising diligence, violating the rules of medical knowledge and deontology that determine their professional duties (Supreme Court decision of 27 June 2017, II CSK 69/17, Supreme Court case law, available on in addition to clearly indicated sources).

The concept of medical malpractice refers not only to therapeutic error – treatment error, including operational error, but also to diagnostic error – misdiagnosis. If specialized tests are required before a surgical procedure, the diagnostic error may be related to the stage of these tests, and the consequence may be an incorrect diagnosis of the disease, leading to an incorrect decision about the operation or the extent of such an operation. . (Supreme Court decision of 24 October 2013, IV TsSK 64/13).