Abstract
The original report by the medical accident investigation committee for postoperative death with laparoscopic hepatectomy at Gunma University Hospital was considerably criticized for the reasons such as an addition of negligence. Even though it was in the middle of the unexpected confusion, such description was a misjudgment as an organization. There may be a number of backgrounds behind the criticism, but as one of the issues, there would be confusion between the committee report with the participation of external members and the hospital decision. This committee was a different establishment from an ordinary hospital medical accident investigation committee, but there were a number of aspects for improvement when re-examining the hospital medical accident investigation system along with the review of the investigation process. Since there was a delay to initially correspond with bereaved family during the confusion, explanation at the start of the survey and disclosure of medical records were also clearly documented in writing. It is now required to standardize a method or process in accident investigation. While making an effort to maintain common recognition among the relevant people for accident investigation in the hospital, we need to review assured correspondence at the time of accident.
