Teledermatology, teledermatopathology, interstate dermatopathology and the law

Reforms, Errors, and Dermatopathology Malpractice: Then and Now: A Comprehensive Retrospective

Medical malpractice occurs when a hospital, doctor, or other health care professional, through a negligent act or omission, causes an injury to a patient. The negligence might be the result of errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare, or health management. To be considered medical malpractice under the law, the claim must violate the standard of care, the injury must be caused by the negligence and, last but most certainly not least, the injury must result in significant damages. This review is an overview of medicolegal issues specific to the practice of Dermatopathology with the caveat that most are likely pertinent to other specialties of pathology as well. The safety of patients remains the priority in pathology as it does in any medical undertaking, and this is no different in the practice of Dermatopathology. The review is broadly divided in 2 parts-we begin with an overview of tort reforms, advocated by physicians to reduce costs associated with malpractice defense. In the second part we address practical issues specific to the practice of pathology and dermatopathology. These include among others, errors-related to the biopsy type, inadequacy of clinical information regarding the lesion that is biopsied, role of interstate dermatopathology as well as examples of select entities commonly misdiagnosed in dermatopathology. In the last decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has moved to the forefront of technology. While research into the uses of AI in pathology is promising, the use of AI in diagnostic practice is still somewhat uncommon. Given that AI is not fully integrated routinely as a diagnostic adjunct, its' impact on pathology-specific medicolegal issues cannot, as yet at least, be defined. Restriction of medical malpractice is of particular relevance in the COVID-19 era, a period that is anything but normal. The response of states with specific pandemic-related guidelines is addressed with the caveat that this particular issue is only covered in select states. Furthermore, given that the COVID pandemic is only a year old, while it does not appear to have had an immediate impact on pathology-specific medicolegal matters, it is possible that the role of COVID on this issue, if any at all, will and can only be fully defined a few years down the line.

State restrictions on the interstate practice of dermatopathology are unconstitutional: the tissue is the issue

The regulation of the interstate practice of dermatopathology, teledermatopathology and teledermatology is the subject of discussion in many recent articles. Laws and regulations in many states complicate such interstate practice, requiring the dermatopathologist to be licensed in the state where the biopsy is taken if the dermatopathologist practices in and is licensed in a different state. To date, this discussion has been from the viewpoint of the dermatopathologist or dermatologist. But, when seen from the patient's viewpoint, its apparent that most such state regulation may be void as an unconstitutional infringement of a patient's fundamental right of unrestricted interstate travel under the Constitution of the United States of America.