title: Accessory nerve injury.
abstract: This article discusses a Supreme Court judgment involving an injury to the spinal accessory nerve which occurred during the excision of a lymph node mass in the posterior triangle of the neck.1 In this case, the medical practitioner was found to have been negligent for failing to diagnose the nerve injury in the postoperative period, and not for the actual injury to the nerve during the procedure.
authors.affiliation: MDA National. sbird@mdanational.com.au
authors.forename: Sara
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Bird
mesh_terms: D000038:Abscess / Q000601:surgery*; D061227:Accessory Nerve Injuries; D000328:Adult; D001315:Australia; D005194:Family Practice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D005260:Female; D013502:General Surgery / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D007431:Intraoperative Complications; D009333:Neck / Q000601:surgery*; D011247:Pregnancy; D012008:Recurrence; D012308:Risk Management / Q000379:methods; D020069:Shoulder Pain / Q000209:etiology