FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1964164564> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1964164564 endingPage "665" @default.
• W1964164564 startingPage "665" @default.
• W1964164564 abstract "I hope your summer was relaxing and now you are enjoying the colors of autumn!This issue of JNP contains excellent articles on legal issues pertinent to our profession. When we became nurse practitioners (NPs), we entered into a new legal realm that we were not necessarily concerned about as RNs. For most of us, malpractice took on a whole new meaning, along with a higher level of legal accountability. Therefore, it is important for us to understand what can happen and, most importantly, how to prevent problems. While these articles can help us understand the legal issues that confront us in our daily practice, it is also important that we look at the examples of some of our peers who, unfortunately, were involved in legal action.Nursing Services Organization, a corporate partner of ACNP, undertook the only report of its kind that looked at statistical data from CNA claims files on malpractice lawsuits brought against NSO NPs insured between 1998 and 2008. They presented this data at the 2009 National Nurse Practitioner Summit, seeking input from the NP participants on what type of information/analysis of the data would be important for us to know. They presented the follow-up information at the 2010 Summit and recently published it on their website at http://www.nso.com/nursing-resources/claim-studies.jsp.A few of their findings include the following: •Claims for malpractice suits against NPs cost an average $189,300, plus another $42,900 for expenses such as legal costs.•NPs without prescriptive authority appear to be twice as likely to have a professional liability claim as those with prescriptive authority. (The data can be good to use in your fight to gain plenary prescriptive authority in your state!)•NPs who use electronic medical records instead of handwritten records report a lower incidence of malpractice suits.I encourage each of us to read these articles carefully and look at the data from NSO. Take time to examine your practice and check for areas that might leave you and your patients vulnerable. Hopefully, none of us will be a defendant in a future claims study or article! I hope your summer was relaxing and now you are enjoying the colors of autumn! This issue of JNP contains excellent articles on legal issues pertinent to our profession. When we became nurse practitioners (NPs), we entered into a new legal realm that we were not necessarily concerned about as RNs. For most of us, malpractice took on a whole new meaning, along with a higher level of legal accountability. Therefore, it is important for us to understand what can happen and, most importantly, how to prevent problems. While these articles can help us understand the legal issues that confront us in our daily practice, it is also important that we look at the examples of some of our peers who, unfortunately, were involved in legal action. Nursing Services Organization, a corporate partner of ACNP, undertook the only report of its kind that looked at statistical data from CNA claims files on malpractice lawsuits brought against NSO NPs insured between 1998 and 2008. They presented this data at the 2009 National Nurse Practitioner Summit, seeking input from the NP participants on what type of information/analysis of the data would be important for us to know. They presented the follow-up information at the 2010 Summit and recently published it on their website at http://www.nso.com/nursing-resources/claim-studies.jsp. A few of their findings include the following: •Claims for malpractice suits against NPs cost an average $189,300, plus another $42,900 for expenses such as legal costs.•NPs without prescriptive authority appear to be twice as likely to have a professional liability claim as those with prescriptive authority. (The data can be good to use in your fight to gain plenary prescriptive authority in your state!)•NPs who use electronic medical records instead of handwritten records report a lower incidence of malpractice suits. I encourage each of us to read these articles carefully and look at the data from NSO. Take time to examine your practice and check for areas that might leave you and your patients vulnerable. Hopefully, none of us will be a defendant in a future claims study or article!" @default.
• W1964164564 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1964164564 creator A5082400422 @default.
• W1964164564 date "2010-10-01" @default.
• W1964164564 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W1964164564 title "Guarding Against Liability" @default.
• W1964164564 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2010.08.012" @default.
• W1964164564 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W1964164564 type Work @default.
• W1964164564 sameAs 1964164564 @default.
• W1964164564 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1964164564 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1964164564 hasAuthorship W1964164564A5082400422 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C100970517 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2776007630 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2776798817 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2778757428 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2778848561 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2780791683 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C2993819037 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C100970517 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C121332964 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C144133560 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C17744445 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C199539241 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C205649164 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2776007630 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2776798817 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2777834853 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2778757428 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2778848561 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2780791683 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C2993819037 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C39549134 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C62520636 @default.
• W1964164564 hasConceptScore W1964164564C71924100 @default.
• W1964164564 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W1964164564 hasLocation W19641645641 @default.
• W1964164564 hasOpenAccess W1964164564 @default.
• W1964164564 hasPrimaryLocation W19641645641 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W1559557271 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W1569702061 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2081549130 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2093777864 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2098765210 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2368779922 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2408087029 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2484176270 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1964164564 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1964164564 hasVolume "6" @default.
• W1964164564 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1964164564 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1964164564 magId "1964164564" @default.
• W1964164564 workType "article" @default.