Evaluation of medical malpractice claim reports regarding aesthetic medical intervention cases

Abstract

Introduction: Medical malpractice claims in our country, which ranks among the nations with a high frequency of esthetic interventions according to the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ISAPS), have been on the rise. This study aims to evaluate the claims of medical malpractice related to medical interventions for esthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: Files belonging to esthetic medical interventions which were referred from the court and the official institutions or were applicant individually for the purpose of identifying the malpractice between 2011 and 2022 to our institution were reviewed. Results: One hundred cases (82% – female, 18% – male, average age: 35.6) were evaluated. It was determined that 57% of the cases were sent from the consumer court, 33% from the court of first instance, and 7% of them were individual applications. Eighty percent of the cases were operated in operating room conditions, while 20% were office-type interventional procedures. It was determined that 84% of medical practices were performed by doctors and 16% by nonphysicians. After 2016, 85% of cases were referred from the consumer court. Above half of the whole cases (54.2%) had medical malpractice. The most important reason for medical malpractice was the lack of or insufficient informed consent. Conclusion: To prevent errors in esthetic medical interventions, it is necessary to comply with the legal regulations, to have a responsible physician in office-type interventions, to duly prepare and obtain (sign and hide) informed consent, to make the surgery/intervention plan, and to manage complications.

Keywords

• esthetic intervention
• esthetic surgery
• informed consent
• legal
• malpractice