So-called “personalized medicine” will open up a whole new series of liability headaches for physicians:
While drug manufacturers, health insurers, and even pharmacists face some liability risks, physicians are most at risk for lawsuits alleging that they did not recommend genetic tests before prescribing drugs that may harm patients with genetic vulnerabilities.“Physicians are the sitting ducks in this new class of litigation,” Marchant said, “both because they lack the legal defenses available to other parties, and many doctors have not received the training in genetics they need in the new world of personalized medicine.”
Already, a number of filed lawsuits claim physicians can be liable for not recommending or performing certain genetic tests, and that, even when they do, they can be held negligent in the performance of the tests, and the interpretation and communication of them.
Related posts:
- Selling genetic tests directly to the consumer
- Can you sue your doctor over genetic tests?
- Inconclusive genetic testing
- Sergey Brin at risk for Parkinson’s
- How malpractice suits affect physicians
- Middle Eastern physicians
- Defensive medicine in the news
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 2 comments }
I don’t know of any pharmacogenomic tests worth doing yet. It’s far cheaper and easier to monitor liver-function tests (SGOT/SGPT/alk phos) 1-2 months after starting a statin, say, then spending $500-$1,000 for a CYP450 panel.
Could someone mention a “necessary” pharmacogenomic test so we could debate how necessary it really is?
I suspect “necessary” will be dependent on what the plaintiff is trying to sue foe.
Comments on this entry are closed.