The aim of this study is to review issues of legal liability in prescribing choice.
Prescribing not only occurs in a medical setting, but also in a social and legal context in this era of evidence-based medicine and greater consumer awareness.
Prescribers may be unaware of the legal consequences of medical decision-making and prescribing choice.
This issue affects all areas of medicine and can be illustrated by antidepressant choice for major depression.
A review was undertaken of liability issues that may arise in the context of prescribing, with particular reference to prescribing antidepressants.
There are legal precedents which illustrate prescribers'potential liability.
These impose duties on the prescriber including those of care, to inform, and to respond to patients'wishes.
In particular, the duty of care requires that if medicines are of equal efficacy, one should prescribe the best tolerated and least toxic medicine that is most likely to be taken at an effective dose for an adequate duration.
While older and newer antidepressants are generally of equal efficacy, the newer agents have higher tolerability, lower toxicity and are less likely to be associated with treatment failure (due to sub-therapeutic dose regimens, or the patient discontinuing medication), disabling psychomotor impairment, dietary interaction or fatal overdose. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Prescription médicale, Antidépresseur, Psychotrope, Législation, Responsabilité professionnelle, Toxicité, Santé mentale, Australie, Océanie, Homme
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Medical prescription, Antidepressant agent, Psychotropic, Legislation, Occupational responsibility, Toxicity, Mental health, Australia, Oceania, Human
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0403175
Code Inist : 002B18H05C. Création : 25/01/1999.