@article{ref1,
title="Analysis of judicial sentences against psychiatrists dictated by appellate courts in Spain between 1992 and 2007",
journal="Actas espanolas de psiquiatria",
year="2011",
author="Santiago-Sáez, Andrés and Albarrán-Juan, María E. and Perea-Pérez, Bernardo and Labajo-González, Elena and Reneses-Prieto, Blanca",
volume="39",
number="6",
pages="393-400",
abstract="Sentences against psychiatrists dictated in appellate or higher courts of Spain in the period from 1992 to 2007 were analyzed. Decisions were gathered for 13 of the 17 autonomous communities and statistical analysis yielded the following results: in more than 50% of cases, the decision was unfavorable for the psychiatrist, but the damages never exceeded 600,000. The most frequent condition in the series was personality disorders (48.9%). The most frequent reasons for seeking legal redress were monitoring errors and negligence; no cases were brought to trial for therapeutic errors. The patient died in 58.3% of cases. It is noteworthy that 10% of the sentences cited defects in patient information or informed consent. The psychiatric health care teams in both the public and private sector should maximize monitoring of institutionalized patients and optimize installations to provide special security measures for the patients. Key words: Judicial sentences, Unfavorable verdicts, Indemnizations, Monitoring errors, Suicide.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1139-9287",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}