Article

Physicians' Fears Of Malpractice Lawsuits Are Not Assuaged By Tort Reforms

Center for Studying Health System Change, Washington, DC, USA.
Health Affairs (Impact Factor: 4.64). 09/2010; 29(9):1585-92. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0135
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Physicians contend that the threat of malpractice lawsuits forces them to practice defensive medicine, which in turn raises the cost of health care. This argument underlies efforts to change malpractice laws through legislative tort reform. We evaluated physicians' perceptions about malpractice claims in states where more objective indicators of malpractice risk, such as malpractice premiums, varied considerably. We found high levels of malpractice concern among both generalists and specialists in states where objective measures of malpractice risk were low. We also found relatively modest differences in physicians' concerns across states with and without common tort reforms. These results suggest that many policies aimed at controlling malpractice costs may have a limited effect on physicians' malpractice concerns.

Full-text

Available from: Emily R Carrier, Feb 25, 2014
2 Followers
 · 
201 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The impact of medical malpractice reforms on the average size of malpractice payments in specific physician specialties is unknown and subject to debate. We analyzed a national sample of malpractice claims for the period 1985-2010, merged with information on state liability reforms, to estimate the impact of state noneconomic damages caps on average malpractice payment size for physicians overall and for ten different specialty categories. We then compared how the effects differed according to the restrictiveness of the cap ($250,000 versus $500,000). We found that, overall, noneconomic damages caps reduced average payments by $42,980 (15 percent), compared to having no cap at all. A more restrictive $250,000 cap reduced average payments by $59,331 (20 percent), and a less restrictive $500,000 cap had no significant effect, compared to no cap at all. The effect of the caps overall varied according to specialty, with the largest impact being on claims involving pediatricians and the smallest on claims involving surgical subspecialties and ophthalmologists.
    Health Affairs 10/2014; 33(11). DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0492 · 4.32 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective was to determine emergency physician (EP) perceptions regarding 1) the extent to which they order medically unnecessary advanced diagnostic imaging, 2) factors that contribute to this behavior, and 3) proposed solutions for curbing this practice. As part of a larger study to engage physicians in the delivery of high-value health care, two multispecialty focus groups were conducted to explore the topic of decision-making around resource utilization, after which qualitative analysis was used to generate survey questions. The survey was extensively pilot-tested and refined for emergency medicine (EM) to focus on advanced diagnostic imaging (i.e., computed tomography [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). The survey was then administered to a national, purposive sample of EPs and EM trainees. Simple descriptive statistics to summarize physician responses are presented. In this study, 478 EPs were approached, of whom 435 (91%) completed the survey; 68% of respondents were board-certified, and roughly half worked in academic emergency departments (EDs). Over 85% of respondents believe too many diagnostic tests are ordered in their own EDs, and 97% said at least some (mean = 22%) of the advanced imaging studies they personally order are medically unnecessary. The main perceived contributors were fear of missing a low-probability diagnosis and fear of litigation. Solutions most commonly felt to be "extremely" or "very" helpful for reducing unnecessary imaging included malpractice reform (79%), increased patient involvement through education (70%) and shared decision-making (56%), feedback to physicians on test-ordering metrics (55%), and improved education of physicians on diagnostic testing (50%). Overordering of advanced imaging may be a systemic problem, as many EPs believe a substantial proportion of such studies, including some they personally order, are medically unnecessary. Respondents cited multiple complex factors with several potential high-yield solutions that must be addressed simultaneously to curb overimaging. © 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.
    Academic Emergency Medicine 03/2015; 22(4). DOI:10.1111/acem.12625 · 2.20 Impact Factor
  • Source