8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic Review of Professional Liability when Prescribing Β-Lactams for Patients with a Known Penicillin Allergy

      abstract
      , PharmD 1 , , JD, MPH 2 , , PharmD, BCPS 3 , , PharmD 4
      Open Forum Infectious Diseases
      Oxford University Press

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Patients labeled as penicillin allergic are more likely to receive second line non-β-lactam antibiotics, experience higher rates of treatment failure, and incur higher antibiotic costs. Fear of litigation has been identified as a reason clinicians avoid using β-lactams in a patient with a penicillin allergy. The systematic review objective is to describe medical negligence and malpractice cases in which known penicillin allergy patients received a β-lactam and experienced an adverse reaction.

          Methods

          Lexis-Nexus and Google Scholar were used to identify relevant legal cases. Variables collected from each case included date of publication, legal jurisdiction, date of injury, plaintiff and defendant demographics, health care setting, plaintiff clinical outcome, and legal outcome.

          Results

          Twenty-seven unique cases met inclusion criteria. The earliest case was published in 1959 and the most recent in 2013. The highest number of cases filed
( n = 7) occurred in the most recent 10 year segment, from 2005 to 2015. Eighteen cases involved the receipt of a penicillin-based antibiotic; of these cases with a known legal outcome, the plaintiff (patient) prevailed or settled in 3 cases and defendants (providers) prevailed in 7 cases. Seven cases involved the receipt of a cephalosporin; of these cases with a known legal outcome, the plaintiff settled with physicians prior to trial in 1 case and defendants prevailed in 3 cases. Two cases involved the receipt of a carbapenem. Defendants prevailed in 1 case and the legal outcome of the other case is unknown. In cases where the defense successfully moved for summary judgment, judges cited a lack of scientific evidence demonstrating that a cephalosporin or carbapenem were contraindicated for a patient with a penicillin allergy.

          Conclusion

          The cases with published legal outcomes found limited professional liability and identify clear precedence for clinicians who prescribed cephalosporins or carbapenems to a patient with a known penicillin allergy. These results should decrease litigation fears of providers and risk managers within healthcare systems.

          Disclosures

          All authors: No reported disclosures.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Open Forum Infect Dis
          Open Forum Infect Dis
          ofid
          Open Forum Infectious Diseases
          Oxford University Press (US )
          2328-8957
          Fall 2017
          04 October 2017
          04 October 2017
          : 4
          : Suppl 1 , ID Week 2017 Abstracts
          : S341
          Affiliations
          [1 ] Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy , Aurora, Colorado
          [2 ] Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arizona , Tucson, Arizona
          [3 ] University of Mississippi School of Pharmacy , Jackson, MS
          [4 ] St. Dominic Hospital , Jackson, Mississippi
          Author notes

          Session: 141. Clinical Practice Issues

          Friday, October 6, 2017: 12:30 PM

          Article
          ofx163.812
          10.1093/ofid/ofx163.812
          5631356
          c474fb0a-1a53-493e-8a40-cd22d4285a46
          © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.

          This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

          History
          Page count
          Pages: 1
          Categories
          Abstracts
          Poster Abstract

          Comments

          Comment on this article