Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
I think it would be a good idea for doctors in general,and GPs in
particular,to apprise themselves of legal dilemmas they may have to face
in the diagnosis/treatment of meningitis. The followiing recent
judgments[1],[2] of the High Court illustrate the difficulties that
doctors may encounter in the diagnosis of meningitis in community and
hospital settings.Further,the same judgments also provide useful
commentaries of the legal tests applied in such circumstances in relation
to claims of negligence.Perhaps, doctors should be regularly kept informed
of such medicolegal issues, as such information is likely to have wider
beneficial effects on patients, doctors themselves and their liability
insurers.
References
[1]Brown v Birmingham and Black Country Strategic Health Authority
& Others [2005] EWHC 1098(QB)
" Revalidation " is an eventual inevitability. How many
more incompetencies, scandals, cover-ups etc. are to be endured before the
foot dragging terminates?
Meningitis:Lessons From Some Recent Negligence Cases
I think it would be a good idea for doctors in general,and GPs in
particular,to apprise themselves of legal dilemmas they may have to face
in the diagnosis/treatment of meningitis. The followiing recent
judgments[1],[2] of the High Court illustrate the difficulties that
doctors may encounter in the diagnosis of meningitis in community and
hospital settings.Further,the same judgments also provide useful
commentaries of the legal tests applied in such circumstances in relation
to claims of negligence.Perhaps, doctors should be regularly kept informed
of such medicolegal issues, as such information is likely to have wider
beneficial effects on patients, doctors themselves and their liability
insurers.
References
[1]Brown v Birmingham and Black Country Strategic Health Authority
& Others [2005] EWHC 1098(QB)
(http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2005/1098.html)
[2]McDonnell V Dr Holwerda [2005] EWHC 108(QB)
(http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2005/1081.html)
JS@medical-journals.com
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests