Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Medical Liability”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

[Liability for medical malpractice: an economic approach].

In recent years, changes in the organization of healthcare institutions and the increased number of medical malpractice claims have revealed the need to study the concept of medical responsibility and the repercussion of these changes on healthcare provision. To date, discussion has focussed on legal aspects and economic implications have been largely ignored.The present article reviews studies that have performed an economic analysis the subject. Firstly, we examine studies that gradually introduce the concepts of uncertainty, risk aversion and moral hazard. Secondly, in the healthcare environment, we pay particular attention to models that include new arguments on professionals' objective duties or to bargaining models when there is asymmetric information. Finally, we consider the medical malpractice insurance market and investigate how reputation and the possibilities of exercising defensive medicine influence healthcare provision. Our analysis suggests that, due to the characteristics of the healthcare market, the models proposed by the economy of information are very useful for performing economic analyses of liability in medical malpractice. However, alternative hypotheses also need to be formulated so that these models can be adapted to the specific characteristics of different health systems.

Health Care Sector↗
PubMed2006

Medical malpractice liability in clinical urology: a survey of practicing urologists.

PURPOSE: The current medical malpractice environment is in crisis. Costs associated with litigation as well as medical malpractice insurance premiums have increased during the last decade. In fact as of March 2004 the American Medical Association has identified 19 states as crisis states. We investigated the way in which the medical malpractice environment has affected urologists and the manner in which they practice medicine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of 31 questions was electronically mailed to the American Urological Association's database of practicing urologists in the United States. Data were gathered on each urologist's malpractice history as well as their clinical practice. A total of 5,919 surveys were mailed and 683 (12%) were returned. Urologists from 47 states responded. RESULTS: The mean medical malpractice premium in 2003 was 30,665 dollars (median 22,500 dollars, range 6,000 dollars to 120,000 dollars). Of responding urologists 63% report being named in a medical malpractice lawsuit a mean of 2.1 times. Mean length of time practicing urology was 19 years. Of the lawsuits 28% involved urological oncology, 12% involved endourology and 10% involved female urology. All other urological specialties individually generated less than 10% of the lawsuits. In only 3.5% of the cases was the patient successful at trial, compared to 13.2% of the cases where the urologist was successful at trial. The case was dropped or dismissed without financial settlement 46.9% of the time. However, 36.3% of the time the case was settled with a pretrial financial settlement. The mean amount awarded to a patient at trial was 213,855 dollars (median 100,000 dollars, range 2,400 dollars to 1,000,000 dollars). When a patient was awarded pain and suffering at trial, the mean amount awarded was 270,000 dollars (median 85,000 dollars, range 30,000 dollars to 900,000 dollars). The mean amount given to the patient as pretrial settlement was 196,706 dollars (median 70,000 dollars, range 1,500 dollars to 5,000,000). The mean time a urologist spent defending their first lawsuit was 21.8 days. Given the current medical malpractice environment, 58% of responding urologists are considering referring difficult cases, 60% are considering limiting the scope of their practice, 26% are considering changing the state in which they practice and 41% are considering leaving the practice of medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience has shown that the medical malpractice crisis has had a profound and real effect on the urological community. When the data are stratified according to those urologists who practice in a crisis state, we consistently see a pattern whereby the crisis state urologists are carrying a larger proportion of the malpractice burden. Most concerning is how the malpractice environment has changed the way in which urologists approach their practice. A larger percentage of urologists from crisis states are reporting that they are considering limiting the scope of their practice, moving their practice to a state with a more favorable malpractice environment and considering leaving the practice of urology altogether. Clearly the urologist is not immune from the current malpractice environment.

Liability, Legal↗
PubMed1998

Child neurologist as expert witness: a report of the Ethics and Practice Committees of the Child Neurology Society.

A questionnaire was circulated to 1126 members of the Child Neurology Society to assess their opinions regarding the current medical-legal system and to determine the involvement of members of the Child Neurology Society as expert witnesses. Two-hundred eighty-five questionnaires were completed, corresponding to a response rate of 25.3%. Of the respondents, 52% were child neurologists in university-based, academic practices, whereas 32% were in private practice. Approximately 90% of the respondents reviewed cases for attorneys, and 37% of these reviewed five or more cases per year. The majority, 86%, had testified or been deposed as a treating physician, and 42% of the respondents had been the object of a medical liability lawsuit. Only 30% of the respondents believed that the current medical malpractice system was fair, and nearly 90% of the respondents indicated that the system should be reformed. Two thirds of the respondents indicated that there should be a mechanism for peer review and more than half believed that the Child Neurology Society should monitor the expert witness activities of its members. These results indicate that although child neurologists frequently participate as medical experts, the respondents have an unfavorable opinion of the current medical liability system. Based on the results of the questionnaire and the need for reform in the current system, monitoring of the expert witness activities of child neurologists should be considered.

Child↗
PubMed1997

Legal and policy considerations in using clinical practice guidelines.

The increased use of clinical practice guidelines has implications for both public policy and for litigation. Physicians are concerned that the introduction of practice guidelines will reduce their clinical decision-making authority and that the failure to follow clinical practice guidelines will lead to medical liability. Although practice guidelines are an increasing part of medical practice, there has been only limited litigation to determine the extent to which guidelines will be used to set the applicable standard of care. This article discusses the potential legal and public policy issues raised by the introduction and use of clinical practice guidelines. From a legal perspective, the primary issue is whether guidelines will be used to set the "standard of care" or will be one piece of evidence that a jury would use to determine the outcome of medical liability litigation. Based on an assessment of the applicable legal and policy considerations, the article concludes that courts should admit guidelines into evidence, but that they should not be used as the sole determinant of the standard of care. Instead, guidelines should be treated as one piece of evidence to be weighed by the jury. This approach will facilitate physician acceptance of guidelines by not imposing liability for the failure to follow guidelines without additional evidence to determine the standard of care.

Clinical Medicine↗
PubMed1990

Liability for medical record disclosure is real but rare.

The most recent public concern for patient confidentiality has centered on the medical records of AIDS patients. However, a new confidentiality concern is the liability of the self-insured hospital that reviews medical claims internally. Also, the sometimes conflicting demands of protecting patient confidentiality and being reimbursed in a timely fashion are setting off sparks between the medical records department and the business office.

Confidentiality↗
PubMed2003

Medical malpractice liability crisis meets markets: stress in unexpected places.

While the causes of rapidly rising medical malpractice insurance premiums remain contentious and unsettled, the consequences are rippling through communities, threatening to diminish patients' access to care and increase health care costs, with an uncertain impact on quality, according to findings from the Center for Studying Health System Change's (HSC) 2002-03 site visits to 12 nationally representative communities. The severity of malpractice insurance problems varied across communities, with some physicians changing how and where they care for patients. For example, rather than treat patients in their offices, more physicians are referring patients to emergency departments. And many physicians, especially those practicing in high-risk specialties, are unwilling to provide emergency department on-call coverage because of malpractice liability concerns.

Emergency Service, Hospital↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Contraceptive choices--turning back the clock.

Contraceptive choices are being reduced rather than being expanded in many parts of the world, particularly in Western countries. Although this paper presents an Australian perspective, the concerns are shared by family planners in other countries. The reasons for this are multiple and complex and often interrelated but ultimately depend on commercial considerations. The community expectation is that an ideal contraceptive can and does exist, but the media sensationalization of contraceptive problems has given many contraceptive methods a poor image. Contraceptive availability is also affected by liability issues, which have increased the cost of product liability insurance, and medical liability insurance of health professionals, increasing both the cost of contraceptives to the individual and the availability of services such as IUD insertions and sterilization, as practitioners withdraw their services, due to cost of insurance. The cost of marketing a new contraceptive from the time the idea is first developed until it is approved for marketing also deters manufacturers from developing new contraceptives. Delays in drug evaluation procedures in many countries deters companies with already well established contraceptives from marketing them in such countries. The effect of political stands by radical feminists or consumer groups, also effect both the image and the availability of contraceptives, as can be seen with the saga of Depo-Provera, RU486 and intrauterine devices. Similarly, the moral perceptions of anti-abortion groups and health care providers is also a threat to fertility control services. Possible solutions to some of these problems are offered in the paper.

Contraception↗