Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

Legal aspects of men's genitourinary health

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 21, pages 165–170 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

Men's health issues have increasingly gained attention not only in the mass media, but also among most health-care providers. The diagnosis and treatment of male-related health problems, unfortunately, can lead to complications and error-related injuries resulting in claims of medical malpractice. This review article will look at the most common claims relating to complications and injuries in the management of men's health issues. Reviews of the literature over the past three decades using multiple search engines including PubMed were utilized. The most pertinent articles were selected on the basis of their relevance to men's health issues, complications and medico-legal ramifications. An evaluation of the literature reveals that although the number of claims against urologists has not increased over the past several decades, indemnity payments have continued to rise significantly. Claims can be divided into those relating to diagnosis and those relating to treatment. Providers of men's health care may become involved in claims of medical malpractice at some time during their careers. Patients’ care can result in complications and injuries, most of which do not lead to claims. Certain areas of men's health lead to more claims than others. The keys to prevention and management of those claims are good communication, informed consent and documentation.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kahan SE, Goldman HB, Marengo S, Resnick ML . Urological medical malpractice. J Urol 2001; 165: 1638.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Perrotti M, Badger W, Prader S, Moran ME . Medical malpractice in urology, 1985–2004: 469 consecutive cases closed with indemnity payment. J Urol 2006; 176: 2154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sobel DL, Loughlin KR, Coogan CL . Medical malpractice liability in clinical urology: a survey of practicing urologists. J Urol 2006; 175: 1847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hsieh MH, Tan AG, Meng MV . Medical malpractice in American urology: 22-year national review of the impact of caps and implications for contemporary practice. J Urol 2008; 179: 1944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Badger WJ, Moran ME, Abraham C, Yarlagadda B, Perrotti M . Missed diagnoses by urologists resulting in malpractice payment. J Urol 2007; 178: 2537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Waxman SW . Medico-legal issues in urology. Leg Med 2007; 13–21.

  7. Kaplan GW . Malpractice risks for urologists. Urology 1998; 51: 183.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanbar SS, Warner J . Medical malpractice overview. Leg Med, 7th edn. 2007; 253–256.

  9. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS (eds). To Err is Human: Building a Safer Healthcare System. National Academy Press: Washington DC, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Leape LL . Error in medicine. JAMA 1994; 272: 1851.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dunn IB, Kirk D . Legal pitfalls in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2000; 86: 304–307.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Int Med 2006; 145: 488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brawley OW . Prostate cancer screening: clinical applications and challenges. Urol Oncol 2004; 22: 353–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gann PH . Informed consent for prostate-specific antigen testing. Urology 2003; 61: 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Arnold EP . Medicolegal cases relating to bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int 2000; 86: 308–312.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Te AE, Malloy TR, Stein BS, Ulchaker JC, Nseyo UO, Hai MA et al. Photoselective vaporization of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 12-month results from the first United States multicenter prospective trial. J Urol 2004; 172: 1404–1408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Medical Malpractice. VIII Illustrative Awards, Case References, and Information Sources. CHAPTER 40 Illustrative Awards. 6-40 Medical Malpractice § 40.34. Copyright 2007, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group.

  18. McManus PL, Wheatley KE . Consent and complications: risk disclosure varies widely between individual surgeons. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2003; 85: 79–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Preston JM . Vasectomy: common medicolegal pitfalls. BJU Int 2000; 86: 339–343.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Babayan RK, Krane RJ . Vasectomy: what are the community standards? Urology 1986; 27: 328–330.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Belker AM, Sexter MS, Sweitzer SJ, Raff MJ . The high rate of noncompliance for post-vasectomy semen examination: medical and legal considerations. J Urol 1990; 144: 284–286.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Weiske WH . Vasectomy. Andrologia 2001; 33: 125–134.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Benger JR, Swami SK, Gingell JC . Persistent spermatozoa after vasectomy: a survey of British urologists. Br J Urol 1995; 76: 376–379.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Makhlouf AA, Niederberger CS . Ensuring vasectomy success: what is the standard? J Androl 2006; 27: 637–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gingell C, Crosby D, Carroll R . Review of the complications and medicolegal implications of vasectomy. Postgrad Med J 2001; 77: 656–659.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kahan S, Goldman H, Marengo S, Resnick M . Urological medical malpractice. J Urol 2001; 165: 1638–1642.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. WHO/UNAIDS. New Data on Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Policy and Program Implications. World Health Organization/Joint United Nations Programmed on HIV/AIDS: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.

  28. Holman J, Stuessi K . Adult circumcision. Am Fam Physician 1999; 59: 1514–1520.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Solomon LM, Noll RC . Male versus female genital alteration: differences in legal, medical, and socioethical responses. Gend Med 2007; 4: 89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gerharz EW, Haarmann C . The first cut is the deepest? Medicolegal aspects of male circumcision. BJU Int 2000; 86: 332–338.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Senkul T . Circumcision in adults: effect on sexual function. Urology 2004; 63: 155–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Collins S, Upshaw J, Rutchik S, Ohannessian C, Ortenberg J, Albertsen P . Effects of circumcision on male sexual function: debunking a myth? J Urol 2002; 167: 2111–2112.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Fink K, Carson C . Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction. J Urol 2002; 167: 2113–2116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Krieger J, Mehta S . Adult male circumcision: effects on sexual function and sexual satisfaction in Kisumu, Kenya. J Sex Med 2008; 5: 2610–2622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Reddy CR, Devendranath V, Pratap S . Carcinoma of penis-role of phimosis. Urology 1984; 24: 85–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kahan SE, Seftel AD, Resnick MI . Sildenafil and the Internet. J Urol 2000; 163: 919–923.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Irwin JR . Legal aspect of urologic prosthetic devices. Urol Clin North Am 1989; 16: 165–174.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hendry WF . Testicular, epididymal and vassal injuries. BJU Int 2000; 86: 344–348.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Morey AF, Foley HT, McLeoad DG, Pendergrass TL . Malpractice claims for urogenital injuries. J Urol 1988; 140: 1475–1478.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Phonsombat S, Master VA, McAninch JW . Penetrating external genital trauma: a 30-year single institution experience. J Urol 2008; 180: 192–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cass AS, Cass BP, Veeranghawan K . Immediate exploration of the unilateral acute scrotum in young male subjects. J Urol 1980; 124: 829–832.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Matteson JR, Stock JA, Hanna MK, Nagler A, Nagler HM . Medicolegal aspects of testicular torsion. Urology 2001; 57: 783–786.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Kalfa N . Multicenter assessment of ultrasound of the spermatic cord in children with acute scrotum. J Urol 2007; 177: 297–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sidhu PS . Clinical and imaging features of testicular torsion: role of ultrasound. Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 343–352.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Cuckow PM, Frank JD . Torsion of the testis. BJU Int 2000; 86: 349–353.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Cayan S, Kadioglu TC, Tefekli A, Kadioglu A, Tellaloglu S . Comparison of results and complications of high ligation surgery and microsurgical high inguinal varicocelectomy in the treatment of varicocele. Urology 2000; 55: 750–754.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Amelar RD . Early and late complications of inguinal varicocelectomy. J Urol 2003; 170: 366–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kiddoo DA, Wollin TA, Mador DA . A population based assessment of complications following outpatient hydrocelectomy and spermatocelectomy. J Urol 2004; 171: 746–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zahalsky MP, Berman AJ, Nagler HM . Evaluation the risk of epididymal injury during hydrocelectomy and spermatocelectomy. J Urol 2004; 171: 2291–2292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Hickey JD, Cowan J . Risk management and medicolegal issues in urology. BJU Int 2000; 86: 271–274.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. The Joint Commission, www.jointcommission.org, 2008.

  52. Notley RG, Reynard JM, Badenoch J . Urology and the law. Lessons from Litigation. Introduction, Informa UK Ltd: London, UK, 2007.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, USA

    J Henning & S Waxman

Authors
  1. J Henning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. S Waxman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S Waxman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Henning, J., Waxman, S. Legal aspects of men's genitourinary health. Int J Impot Res 21, 165–170 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2009.4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2009.4

Keywords

Search

Advanced search

Quick links