“Health Courts” and Accountability for Patient Safety

Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Milbank Quarterly (Impact Factor: 5.06). 02/2006; 84(3):459-92. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2006.00455.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Proposals that medical malpractice claims be removed from the tort system and processed in an alternative system, known as administrative compensation or "health courts," attract considerable policy interest during malpractice "crises," including the current one. This article describes current proposals for the design of a health court system and the system's advantages for improving patient safety. Among these advantages are the cultivation of a culture of transparency regarding medical errors and the creation of mechanisms to gather and analyze data on medical injuries. The article discusses the experiences of foreign countries with administrative compensation systems for medical injury, including their use of claims data for research on patient safety; choices regarding the compensation system's relationship to physician disciplinary processes; and the proposed system's possible limitations.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present liability system is not serving well childbearing women and newborns, maternity care clinicians, or maternity care payers. Examination of evidence about the impact of this system on maternity care led us to identify seven aims for a high-functioning liability system in this clinical context. Herein, we identify policy strategies that are most likely to meet these aims and contribute to needed improvements. A companion paper considers strategies that hold little promise. We considered whether 25 strategies that have been used or proposed for improvement have met or could meet the seven aims. We used a best available evidence approach and drew on more recent empirical legal studies and health services research about maternity care and liability when available, and considered other studies when unavailable. Ten strategies seem to have potential to improve liability matters in maternity care across multiple aims. The most promising strategy-implementing rigorous maternity care quality improvement (QI) programs-has led to better quality and outcomes of care, and impressive declines in liability claims, payouts, and premium levels. A number of promising strategies warrant demonstration and evaluation at the level of states, health systems, or other appropriate entities. Rigorous QI programs have a growing track record of contributing to diverse aims of a high-functioning liability system and seem to be a win-win-win prevention strategy for childbearing families, maternity care providers, and payers. Effective strategies are also needed to assist families when women and newborns are injured.
    Women s Health Issues 01/2013; 23(1):e25-37. DOI:10.1016/j.whi.2012.11.003 · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of primary health care 01/2012; 4(1):77-9.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Delay in receipt of the first vaccine dose in the primary series is one of the strongest and most consistent predictors of subsequent incomplete immunisation. To describe the on-time immunisation delivery of New Zealand infant scheduled vaccines by primary care practices and identify characteristics of practices, health professionals and patients associated with delays in receipt of infant immunisations. Timeliness of immunisation delivery and factors associated with timely immunisation were examined in 124 randomly selected primary care practices in two large regions of New Zealand. A multiple regression model of demographic, practice, nurse, doctor and caregiver association explained 68% of the variance in immunisation timeliness between practices. Timeliness was higher in practices without staff shortages (ß-coefficient -0.0770, p= 0.01), where nurses believed parental apathy (ß-coefficient 0.0819, p=0.008) or physicians believed parental access (ß-coefficient 0.109, p=0.002) was a barrier, and lower in practices with Maori governance (ß-coefficient -0.0868, p=0.05), higher social deprivation (ß-coefficient -0.0643, <0.001) and where caregivers received immunisation-discouraging information (ß-coefficient -0.0643, p=0.04). Interventions supporting practice teams and providers in primary care settings could produce significant improvements in immunisation timeliness.
    Journal of primary health care 01/2012; 4(1):12-20.


Available from