Awareness of medico-legal risks related to anesthesiology among anesthesiologists in China: a survey-based analysis

Abstract

Abstract Background Despite the rising trend in anesthesia-related legal risks in China, there remains insufficient research on the topic. We aimed to conduct a cross-sectional survey to better understand Chinese anesthesiologists' understanding of legal risks related to their practice, narcotics and other drugs, and emergency rescue requirements. Methods An anonymous online questionnaire covering various aspects of legal risks related to anesthesia was sent via email to anesthesiologists practicing in China. Data were collected from February 1, 2023, to April 1, 2023. We assessed (1) the incidence of medical compensation claims for anesthesiologists in China; (2) awareness of laws related to drugs and narcotic drugs; and (3) awareness of emergency rescue protocols. Results A total of 224 anesthesiologists completed the questionnaires. The incidence of medical compensation was 5.8%. Chinese anesthesiologists were unaware of many aspects of laws related to their practice, with the average response accuracy being 63.4%. Additionally, 85.3% of the respondents did not know the legal consequences of anesthesiologists forging, altering, buying, selling, renting, or loaning physician practicing certificates. Furthermore, there was low awareness of laws related to narcotics and other drugs. The average response accuracy was only 48.1%, and most (75%) of the respondents did not know the penalties for anesthesiologists who illegally supply narcotic drugs. Among the respondents, 71.4% did not know that anesthesiologists who do not obtain the required qualifications for the prescription of narcotic and Class I psychotropic drugs are in violation of the law and bear legal responsibility. Only 56.0% of the anesthesiologists were aware of their responsibilities related to emergency rescue. The vast majority (86.6%) of the respondents did not know the legal consequences of refusing or irresponsibly delaying emergency treatment to patients. Conclusions This is the first study to investigate anesthesiologists' perceptions and understanding of anesthesia-related legal risks in China. Such legal risks deserve attention from medical institutions given the potentially far-reaching implications of medical errors, the psychological burden on healthcare workers, and healthcare delivery policymaking. Additional education of anesthesiologists on their legal obligations should be considered.