Information and approaches of emergency department physicians in the Cappadocia region regarding the preparation of forensic reports

Abstract

Aims: Forensic reports; these are physician’s opinion and opinion reports, which are mostly prepared by emergency room physicians regarding the medical conditions of people and reported to the judicial authorities. In this study; it was aimed to examine the attitudes and behaviors of emergency physicians working in the Cappadocia region regarding the preparation of forensic reports. Methods: This cross-sectional study; it was conducted with a survey applied to 73 emergency physicians working in Nevşehir city center and districts. The data was created based on the answers given to this survey form. Results: The majority of physicians participating in the study are general practitioners (87.7%). The average length of service of the participants is 2.3 1.1 years. Most physicians reported that the forensic medicine training they received was insufficient (75.3%). Survey answers of the participants; They were compared in terms of their titles, length of service and forensic medicine training. Conclusion: Regular in-service training should be provided at intervals so that more appropriate forensic reports can be kept and physicians can have more information about the legal part of forensic reports.

Keywords

• Forensic medicine
• forensic report
• emergency service

References

1. Karasu M, Baransel, Isır A, Aydın N, Dülger E. Assessing the forensic reports documented by Forensic Medicine Department of Medicine Faculty of Gaziantep University between 1998 and 2005 years. Eur J Therapeutics. 2009;15(1):10-15.
2. Terece C, Kocak AO, Soğukpınar VO, Gürpınar K, Aslıdük H. Evaluation of forensic reports issued in emergency departments and comparison with reports issued by the council of forensic medicine. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2022;28(2):140-146.
3. Tıraşçı Y, Durmaz U, Altınal A, et al. Retrospective evaluation of forensic reports prepared by dicle university forensic medicine department between 2012 and 2015. Dicle Med J. 2016;43(3):424-430.
4. Beyaztaş YF. Physician responsibility regarding forensic report. Anadolu Psikiyatr Derg. 2000;1(4):231-234.
5. Türkmen N, Akgöz S, Çoltu A, Ergin N. Evaluation of forensic cases admitted to uludağ university faculty of medicine emergency department. Uludağ University Faculty of Medicine J. 2005;31(1):25-29.
6. Hakkoymaz H, Keten HS, Artuç S, et al. Evaluation of medico-legal reports in respect of the turkish penal code. J Kartal TR. 2014;25(3):177-180.
7. Erdoğan Çetin Z, Teyin A, Birben B, Çetin B, Şahiner GG, Hamamcı M. Evaluation of forensic reports prepared in the emergency department. Bozok Med J. 2018;8(4):34-40.
8. Kuş C, Avşar A, Karabekiroğlu B. Primary care physicians’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviors regarding forensic reports. JAMER. 2023;8(2):14-20.

9. Turla A, Dündar C. Forensic medicine education of general practitioners who prepare forensic reports in Samsun city center and their reflections on forensic reports. OMU Med J. 2003;20(3):119-124.
10. Kumral B, Özdaş T. Physicians’ views and evaluations on medical malpractice in Tekirdağ province. Int J Basic Clin Med. 2013;1(2):83-93.
11. Yavuz Y, Yürümez Y, Küçüker H, Demirel R, İkizceli İ, Akdur O. Evaluation of emergency medicine physicians’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviors regarding forensic report preparation. Turk Emerg Med J. 2004;4(2):64-67.
12. Tuğcu H, Yorulmaz C, Ceylan S, Baykal B, Celasun B, Koç S. Knowledge and opinions of physicians participating in the emergency department on physician responsibility in emergency cases and forensic medicine problems. Gülhane Med J. 2003;45(2):175-179.
13. Günaydın İG, Demirci Ş, Doğan KH, Aynacı Y. Konya ilinde çalışan acil servis hekimlerinin adli raporlara yaklaşımı: bir anket çalışması. Adli Tıp Derg. 2005;19(2):26-32.
14. Özdemir Ç, Mıstık S. Erciyes Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi intörn hekimleri adli tıp hizmetlerine bakışı. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası. 2004;15(15):3-8.
15. Çolak B, Biçer Ü, Gündoğmuş NG, Etiler N. Kocaeli ilinde görev yapan ve pratisyen hekimler. Adli Tıp Derg. 2001;15(2):36-45.
16. Dokgöz H, Tırtıl L, Akgül E, Günaydın U. Etkili eylemlerde düzenlenen adli raporlarda kullanılan kavramlar ile rapor düzenlenmesinde karşılaşılan güçlükler (bir anket çalışması). Adli Tıp Derg. 2003;2:28-34.
17. Serinken M, Türkçüer İ, Acar K, Özen M. Acil servis hekimleri tarafından düzenlenen adli raporların eksiklik ve yanlışlıklar yönünden değerlendirilmesi. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2011;17(1):23-28.
18. Eroğlu SE, Toprak SN, Karataş AD, et al. Acil hekimleri için “geçici” adli raporların anlamı nedir? kendini koruma? önyargı? alışkanlık? Tr J Emerg Med. 2013;13(1):13-18.
19. Korkmaz T, Kahramansoy N, Erkol Z, Sarıçil F, Kılıç A. Acil Servise Başvuran Adli Olguların ve Düzenlenen Adli Raporların Değerlendirilmesi. Haseki Tip Bülteni. 2012;50(1):14-20.
20. Demir V, Korkmaz M, Uysal C, Bucaktepe P, Bucaktepe A, Çelepkolu T. Tıp fakültesi son sınıf öğrencileri ve tıpta uzmanlık öğrencisi doktorların adli raporlar konusundaki bilgi ve tutumları. Konuralp Med J. 2019;11(2):190-194.