The influence of fears of perceived legal consequences on general practitioners' practice in relation to defensive medicine - a cross-sectional survey in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Medical decisions are influenced by a variety of factors also by legal requirements and feelings of uncertainty, which results in the term defensive medicine. The aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of fears of perceived legal consequences on the practice of defensive medicine from the perspective of German general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed from April to May 2022. GPs were invited via an e-mail newsletter of the Institute for Continuing Education in Family Medicine in the German Association of General Practitioners and via an online platform of the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians. The evaluation of legal fears, the general assessment of defensive medicine and reasons for and the frequency of defensive medical measures were surveyed in this study. Beside descriptive analyses, a stepwise linear regression analysis was used to explore potential associations between for the primary outcome variable 'fears of legal consequences' on the practice of defensive medicine. RESULTS: 413 general practitioners with an average age of 50 years (51% female) responded. The majority rated their fears of legal consequences as low to average whereas for almost a third (27%, n = 113) the fears were strong to very strong. Regarding legal fears, the physician-patient-relationship played a fairly to very large role for 48% (n = 198) of the respondents. One third estimated the probability of being sued civilly in the next 10 years as rather high to very high. 47% (n = 193) of the participants assumed that the risk of being sued could mostly to very much be reduced by defensive medicine. Legal self-protection was for 38% of the responders (n = 157) quite frequently to very frequently a reason for acting defensively. Consequently, half of the respondents stated that they performed unnecessary laboratory tests at least once per week and 40% indicated that they referred patients for radiological diagnostics without medical indication once per month. CONCLUSIONS: As legal fears have an influence on medical practice and legal self-protection being a frequent reason for defensive behaviour, understanding and knowledge of the law should be improved by legal education at university and further training of post-graduate trainees and practicing physicians should be implemented. Additionally, a more in-depth enlightenment of society about the phenomenon of Protective and Defensive Medicine and its consequences could be a possibility to decrease the perceived fears of legal consequences on the physicians' side.

Prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine among physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Defensive medicine, characterized by physicians' inclination toward excessive diagnostic tests and procedures, has emerged as a significant concern in modern healthcare due to its high prevalence and detrimental effects. Despite the growing concerns among healthcare providers, policymakers, and physicians, comprehensive synthesis of the literature on the prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine among physicians has yet been reported. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2022, utilizing six databases (i.e. Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library). A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine. Of the 8892 identified articles, 64 eligible studies involving 35.9 thousand physicians across 23 countries were included. The overall pooled prevalence of defense medications was 75.8%. Physicians engaged in both assurance and avoidance behaviors, with the most prevalent subitems being increasing follow-up and avoidance of high-complication treatment protocols. The prevalence of defensive medicine was higher in the African region [88.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 80.4%-95.8%] and lower-middle-income countries (89.0%; 95% CI: 78.2%-99.8%). Among the medical specialties, anesthesiologists (92.2%; 95% CI: 89.2%-95.3%) exhibited the highest prevalence. Further, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the nine factors at the individual, relational, and organizational levels were calculated, and the influence of previous experience in medical-legal litigation (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.13-2.18) should be considered. The results of this study indicate a high global prevalence of defensive medicine among physicians, underscoring the necessity of implementing targeted interventions to reduce its use, especially in certain regions and specialties. Policymakers should implement measures to improve physicians' medical skills, enhance physician-patient communication, address physicians' medical-legal litigation fears, and reform the medical liability system. Future research should focus on devising and assessing interventions to reduce the use of defensive medicine and to improve the quality of patient care.

Defensive medicine practices as a result of malpractice claims and workplace physical violence: a cross-sectional study from Egypt.

Defensive medicine refers to practices motivated mainly by legal rather than medical purposes. Increased healthcare costs, overutilization of medical services, and potential harm to patients from unnecessary procedures are among its drawbacks. We performed this study to assess the prevalence of defensive medicine practices in Egypt and their associations with experiencing malpractice claims and workplace physical violence. We investigated 1797 physicians (68.1% male), with an average age of 36.8 ± 9.1 years, practicing in Egypt between January 14th and February 23rd, 2023. SPSS was used for statistical analysis. The majority reported engaging in defensive medicine practices. Specifically, 89.6% acknowledged avoiding high-risk procedures, 87.8% refrained from treating high-risk patients, 86.8% admitted to making unnecessary referrals, 84.9% acknowledged ordering unnecessary tests, 61.4% reported performing unnecessary procedures, and 56.4% disclosed prescribing unnecessary medications. Obstetricians and surgeons exhibited the highest rates of defensive medicine. Using linear regression analysis adjusted for age and sex, malpractice claims and workplace physical violence were associated with defensive medicine score (zero-100): ßs (95% CIs) = 5.05 (3.10, 6.99) and 5.60 (3.50, 7.71), respectively, (p values < 0.001). In conclusion, defensive medicine is deeply ingrained in the clinical routines of Egyptian physicians. Establishing a comprehensive national medical liability framework is required.

Practice of defensive medicine among surgeons in Ethiopia: cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Defensive medicine is physicians' deviation from standard medical care which is primarily intended either to reduce or avoid medico legal litigation. Although the Federal Ethics Committee review in Ethiopia has shown that applications for medical/surgical error investigation claims are increasing at an alarming rate, there is no study to date done to estimate the degree of defensive practice done by the physicians with an intention of avoiding this increasing legal claim. This study assessed the practice of defensive medicine among highly litigious disciplines (surgery) and described factors associated with its practice. METHODS: Cross sectional quantitative study using online survey questionnaires was conducted to assess the degree of defensive practice and six factors (age, years of experience, specialty, monthly income, place of practice and previous medico legal history) associated with its practice were assessed among surgeons working in Ethiopia. RESULTS: A total of 430 surgeons directly received an online survey questionnaire and 236 of them successfully completed the questionnaire making the response rate 51.2%. Nearly half of the study participants (51.7%) were aware of the concept of defensive medicine and 174 (74%) reported performing one form of defensive practice. Twenty-nine (12.3%) of the participants have legal dispute history, though only 1.3% of them ended up in penalty. Avoiding high risk procedures was the commonest defensive act performed by 60% of the participants, followed by ordering tests unnecessarily (52.1%). Multinomial logistic regression model showed that there was no association between age of the participant, place of practice, year of experience and defensive practice. This model also showed that cardiothoracic and vascular surgeons perform less defensively than surgeons with other specialty with P value of 0.02. CONCLUSION: The practice of defensive medicine is widespread among surveyed Ethiopian surgeons and further studies are required to objectively estimate the effect of defensive practice on the health care system of the country. Policy makers need to develop strategy towards decreasing this high rate of defensive practice.

Predictors of Defensive Practices among Italian Psychiatrists: Additional Findings from a National Survey.

Background: Defensive medicine is characterized by medical decisions made primarily as a precaution against potential malpractice claims. For psychiatrists, professional responsibility encompasses not only the appropriateness of diagnosis and treatment but also the effects of their interventions on patients and their behaviors. Objective: To investigate the socio-demographic, educational, and occupational characteristics and work-related attitudes that may serve as predictors of defensive medicine among Italian psychiatrists. This research extends the results of a previous analysis based on a national survey. Methods: A secondary analysis of the database of a national survey on attitudes and behaviors of Italian psychiatrists regarding defensive medicine and professional liability was performed for this study. Results: Among 254 surveyed psychiatrists, 153 admitted to practicing defensive medicine, while 101 had this attitude with less than half of their patients. The first group was predominantly comprised of women (p = 0.014), who were younger in age (43.34 y 9.89 vs. 48.81 y 11.66, p < 0.001) and had fewer years of professional experience (12.09 y ± 9.8 vs. 17.46 y ± 11.2, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in prior involvement in complaints (p = 0.876) or the usual place of work (p = 0.818). The most prominent predictors for practicing defensive medicine were (1) considering guidelines and good clinical practices not only for their clinical efficacy but also or exclusively for reducing the risk of legal complaints for professional liability (OR = 3.62; 95%CI, 1.75-7.49), and (2) hospitalizing patients with violent intentions even if not warranted according to their mental state (OR = 2.28; 95%CI, 1.50-3.46, p < 0.001). Prioritizing protection from professional liability over patients' actual needs in prescribing or adjusting drug dosages and in involuntary hospitalization, as well as prescribing lower dosages than recommended for pregnant patients, were identified as additional predictors. Finally, years of professional experience exhibited a protective function against defensive practices. Conclusions: Psychiatrists advocate the need to implement a 'risk management culture' and the provision of more balanced duties in order to ensure ethical and evidence-based care to their patients. A particular source of concern stems from their professional responsibility towards not only the health of patients but also their behavior. However, these aspects conflict with a limited potential for assessment and intervention based on effective clinical tools. A reform of professional liability that considers the specificities of patients cared for by mental health services could contribute to reducing the risk of defensive medicine.

The practice of defensive medicine among Jordanian physicians: A cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Defensive medicine (DM) is a deviation from medical practice that is induced primarily by a threat of liability. While the DM behavior is well studied in the developed countries, little is known in developing countries and never been evaluated in Jordan. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of DM practice in Jordan among physicians and to investigate reasons behind its practice and potential strategies to alleviate this practice. METHODS: In this Cross-sectional study, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to a sample of physicians in both public and private sectors in Jordan. The collection period was from Jan 2021 to June 2021. The prevalence of DM practice was estimated among the study sample. Frequency scores of different DM behaviors, reasons of DM behaviors, and effectiveness of strategies in changing DM behaviors were summarized as average frequency scores with standard deviations. Multivariable linear regression models were conducted to evaluate potential predictors of total assurance and avoidance behavior scores. RESULTS: A total of 175 Jordanian physicians completed the survey. The prevalence of adopting (or witnessing) DM behaviors among the study sample was 68% (n = 119). Diagnostic laboratory exams followed by prescribed medications were the most practiced behaviors in excessive rate during a typical working week. Unfavorable legislation for the physician was reported as the headmost reason for practicing DM, followed by pressure from the public and mass media opinion. Continuous update of knowledge, abilities, and performance and following specific protocols and/or appropriate clinical evidence and appropriate multidisciplinary and multi-professional communication were the most effective strategies that can mitigate DM behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: Defensive medicine practice is common among Jordanian physicians with concerns about increasing pattern in the future.

Defensive medicine through the lens of the managerial perspective: a literature review.

PURPOSE: Several studies have been carried out on defensive medicine, but research from the managerial viewpoint is still scarce. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to conduct a literature review to better understand defensive medicine from a managerial perspective. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A literature review was conducted of studies focusing on the organisational (meso) level of healthcare providers and managerial practices. A final sample of 28 studies was processed. FINDINGS: Defensive medicine has mainly been studied in the USA, and scholars have principally used quantitative surveys. High-risk specialities have been a critical field of investigation, and a large portion of the papers are published in journals that cover medicine, health policy, education and law fields. The analysis showed that operations and the organisation of staffing were the most discussed managerial practices. No study considered planning and budgeting aspects. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The review confirmed that the managerial aspect of defensive medicine has not been fully addressed. Stimulated by this gap, this study analyses the managerial background of the defensive medicine phenomenon and shows which managerial practices have been most analysed. This paper also contributes to developing the literature on defensive medicine from the managerial side. Areas for future research include qualitative studies to investigate the behaviour of managers of healthcare companies to give a different perspective on defensive medicine and organisations' decision-making. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Some important publications might have been missed in this work because of the choice of only two databases. A further limit could be imposed by the use of the English language as an inclusion criterion.

Exploring defensive medicine: examples, underlying and contextual factors, and potential strategies - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Medical errors, unsatisfactory outcomes, or treatment complications often prompt patient complaints about healthcare providers. In response, physicians may adopt defensive practices to mitigate objections, avoid complaints, and navigate lengthy trial processes or other potential threats. However, such defensive medicine (DM) practices can carry risks, including potential harm to patients and the imposition of unnecessary costs on both patients and the healthcare system. Moreover, these practices may run counter to accepted ethical standards in medicine. METHODS: This qualitative study involved conducting semi-structured interviews with 43 physicians, among whom 38 were faculty members at medical universities, 42 had administrative experience at various levels of the health system, and 23 had previously served as health system policymakers. On average, the participants had approximately 23.5 years of clinical experience. The selection of participants was based on purposive sampling. Data collection through interviews continued until data saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Based on the findings, DM manifests in both positive and negative forms, illustrated by instances like ordering unnecessary lab tests, imaging, or consultations, reluctance to admit high-risk patients, and avoiding high-risk procedures. The study participants identified a range of underlying and contextual factors contributing to DM, encompassing organizational-managerial, social, personal, and factors inherent to the nature of defensive medical practices. The results also highlight proposed strategies to address and prevent DM, which can be grouped into organizational-managerial, social, and those focused on modifying the medical complaints management system. CONCLUSION: DM is a multifaceted and significant phenomenon that necessitates a comprehensive understanding of its various aspects, including interconnected and complex structures and underlying and contextual factors. While the results of this study offer a solid foundation for informing policy decisions within the healthcare system and include some explanatory policy suggestions, we encourage policymakers to complement the findings of this study with other available evidence to address any potential limitations and to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the policymaking process related to DM.

The practice of defensive medicine among physicians in the United Arab Emirates: A clinician survey.

Defensive medicine, a term known since the 1960s, may lead to risks in healthcare provision. Reported to be prevalent in North America and Europe, it is thought to be spreading globally. This study aims to evaluate defensive medicine practice among physicians in the United Arab Emirates. A quantitative cross-sectional survey consisting of a twenty-three point questionnaire was conducted after obtaining ethics approval. The response data concerning the practice of defensive medicine were summarized as a percentage of the total. There were 562 respondents. Of these, 307 (54.6%) and 258 (45.9%) were aware of positive and negative defensive medicine practice respectively. Of the respondents, 285 (50.7%) agreed that they feared patients or their attendants and 177 (31.5%) were not willing to accept patients involved in previous legal prosecutions against doctors. Case referral to other colleagues as a form of defensive medicine was reported by 186 (31.1%) respondents. The majority, 339 (60.3%) of the respondents thought that their medical decisions were backed by the hospital's managerial staff. The practice of defensive medicine is common among physicians working in the United Arab Emirates. It is a widespread practicing behavior in respondents who have more than fifteen years of working experience as compared to those with less experience.

Defensive medicine and its related risk factors: evidence from a sample of Iranian surgeons.

OBJECTIVES: Defensive medicine (DM) is the deviation of a physician from normal behavior or what is a good practice and is aimed at reducing or avoiding the risk of legal litigation from patients or their families. Therefore, this study aimed to determine DM-related behaviors and associated risk factors among Iranian surgeons. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 235 surgeons were selected using convenience sampling. The data gathering tool was a researcher-made questionnaire confirmed as a reliable and valid tool. Factors associated with DM-related behaviors were identified using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: DM-related behaviors ranged from 14.9% to 88.9%. The most common positive DM-related behaviors, including unnecessary biopsy (78.7%), imaging and laboratory tests (72.4% and 70.6%), and refusing high-risk patients (61.7%), was the most common negative DM-related behavior. The likelihood of DM-related behaviors was more in younger and less experienced surgeons. Other variables, such as gender, specialty, and lawsuit history, positively affected some DM-related behaviors (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study showed that the proportion of surgeons who frequently performed DM-related behaviors was higher than those who rarely performed it. Therefore, strategies including reforming the rules and regulations for medical errors and litigations, developing and implementing medical guidelines and evidence-based medicine, and improving the medical liability insurance system can reduce DM-related behaviors.

Defensive versus evidence-based medical technology: Liability risk and electronic fetal monitoring in low-risk births.

Technology-intensive birth practices are a hallmark of the overmedicalization of birth. For example, obstetricians routinely use continuous electronic fetal monitoring (EFM), even though this technology is not evidence-based, has a high rate of false positives, and does not improve outcomes in low-risk deliveries. Providers often argue that they must use EFM to protect themselves from malpractice liability, making it a form of defensive medicine. But does variation in actual liability risk contribute significantly to the use of non-evidence-based medical technology like EFM? This study uses multi-level logistic models to examine the effects of malpractice laws and lawsuits on EFM in low-risk births from 1995 to 2003. The models test the hypothesis that state-level variation in liability risk should influence the probability of EFM use. The models reveal that the probability of reporting EFM is higher when states artificially reduce liability risk by capping damage awards, suggesting that objective liability risk does not promote routine EFM and may deter it. In fact, caps on damages limit providers' legal exposure without doing anything to encourage higher quality care. It is possible that states without tort reforms place greater emphasis on patient rights, safety, and quality of care. On the other hand, by reducing liability risk without encouraging improvements in quality, tort reform laws may inadvertently promote more technology use.

Factors influencing defensive medicine-based decision-making in primary care: A scoping review.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Medical decision-making processes in primary care are influenced by defensive medical practice. This involves a high possibility for negative consequences on many levels, for example, patient's health, health care system costs and a crisis of trust in the patient-doctor relationship. Aim of this review was to identify factors of defensive medicine-based decision-making in primary care. METHODS: This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines and included systematic research on MEDLINE, Google Scholar and two German databases for additional grey literature. References provided further literature. Articles in English and German published from 1 January 1982 to 15 June 2022 were assessed. RESULTS: From 911 publications screened, 13 publications [6 qualitative studies and 7 quantitative (3 cross-sectional) studies] were included. In these, four main categories of factors influencing defensive medical practice were identified: (social) media, patients adopting a consumer attitude, health care system based working conditions and physician's tolerance for uncertainty. Pressure deriving from these four different sources is exerted on the general practitioner and may result in a defensive medical decision behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Four categories on influencing factors of defensive medicine could be identified. Strategies to tolerate uncertainty should be trained in under- and postgraduate training.

Raising the Dead? Limits of CPR and Harms of Defensive Practices.

We describe the case of an eighty-four-year-old man with disseminated lung cancer who had been receiving palliative care in the hospital and was found by nursing staff unresponsive, with clinically obvious signs of death, including rigor mortis. Because there was no documentation to the contrary, the nurses commenced cardiopulmonary resuscitation and called a code blue, resulting in resuscitative efforts that continued for around twenty minutes. In discussion with the hospital ethicist, senior nurses justified these actions, mainly citing disciplinary and medicolegal concerns. We argue that moral harms arise from CPR performed on a corpse and that legal concerns about failing to perform it are unfounded. We contend that such efforts are an unintended consequence of managerialist policies mandating do-not-resuscitate orders and advance care plans and of defensive practices that can value the interests of institutions and practitioners over those of patients. Health management teaching should include managerialism and its pitfalls, while clinician training should prioritize ethical reasoning and legal knowledge over defensive practice.

Defensive Medicine in the Context of the Indian Health System.

Defensive medicine; although a recent concept, is slowly beginning to cement its place in the Indian health system. An interaction of multiple factors has paved way for this form of practice. Need for certainty of the diagnosis, lack of hierarchy in medical care, exponential growth of micro/super specializations and private/corporate health institutions, incentive-based practice, increasing incidences of violence against health personnel, rising trend of defamation suites against doctors, bad publicity by media, and interference by elected representatives have jeopardized the situation. This has led to decline in practice of clinical medicine, increased burden of investigations, especially in already compromised public facilities, and high out-of-pocket health expenditure. As much as ethical medical practice, standard patient management protocols, strict protection of interest of medical practitioners by law, responsible role of media and elected representatives are the need of the hour; we need to find ways to accept and incorporate defensive medicine into the modern medicine. Different stakeholders are required to come together and take substantial steps to understand the phenomenon and preserve the art and science of practicing medicine in its true form.

Defensive medicine and the influence of litigation on doctors.

The term defensive medicine is used to describe the behavior of healthcare providers motivated by fear of litigation due to malpractice. It includes both avoidance behavior when the physician is unwilling to perform high risk procedures, as well as excessive ordering of extra tests and procedures. This leads to unnecessary diagnostic and therapeutic interventions which may be invasive and costly. Additionally, such a setting causes harms the patient-doctor relationship. A more specific legal framework, developed with respect to the innate nature of medicine, may improve the situation.

The occurrence, types, reasons, and mitigation strategies of defensive medicine among physicians: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Defensive Medicine (DM) concept refers to all medical care provided by physicians without increasing the benefits to the patient, the primary purpose of which is to prevent the risk of litigation. Although several studies have been published investigating the occurrence of DM around the world, no review conducted on DM among physicians. Therefore, this study aims to summarize and map the available evidence on occurrence, types of behaviors, and reasons for practicing of DM among physicians and possible solutions and strategies to reduce DM in the literature. METHODS: This is a scoping review in which we searched Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed in December 2021. Our target was original studies of any type that included data on DM among physicians between 2000 and 2021. We followed the JBI guideline for conducting a scoping review and for increasing the rigor of the study. First, the percentage was used to summarize the occurrence of DM, and then, findings related to types of behaviors and reasons for practicing DM and mitigation strategies were analyzed inductively in NVivo 10 in three stages. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included in the review. The overall occurrence of DM practice ranged from 6.7 to 99.8%. Two types of DM behaviors including assurance and avoidance behaviors have been identified. The common reasons for practicing DM were categorized into four themes, patient-related reasons, physician-related reasons, organization-related reasons, and society-related reasons. The main strategies to prevent or reduce DM are structured training and education, restoring physician-patient relationships, reform of the health system, and reform of the liability system. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of research studies were conducted in high-income countries, and studies are needed to measure this phenomenon and its consequences in depth in low- and middle-income countries. Various solutions and strategies are needed to reduce defensive behaviors such as structured training and education, restoring physician-patient relationships, reforming the health system, and reforming the liability system.

Medical errors, medical negligence and defensive medicine: A narrative review.

Error in medicine and medical liability has a long history dating back to Antiquity. During the 19th Century, most lawsuits related to errors in treating surgical problems were settled. However, in the first half of the 20th Century, lawsuits claimed that mistakes were related to the doctor's action: the doctor made something wrong (errors of commission). In Brazil, medical error is defined as inappropriate conduct, including negligence and recklessness, that causes harm to the patient. The physician's fear of being suited is the reason for some practice named defensive Medicine (D.M.), defined as ordering unnecessary tests and procedures or avoiding treatments for patients considered at high-risk. Thus, this narrative review aims to analyze and describe the relationship between medical errors, medical negligence, and the practice of D.M. So, the authors propose procedures and attitudes to avoid medical errors and the approach of D.M.: a national focus to create leadership and research tools to enhance the knowledge base about patient safety; a reporting system that would help to identify and learn from errors; the use of a computer-based protocol reminder; some technological devices to help the medical practice (electronic prescribing and information technology systems); creating risk management programs in hospitals. Therefore, the authors conclude that the most critical attitude to avoid medical liability is a good and ethical medical practice with the proper use of technology, based on knowledge of scientific evidence and ethical principles of medicine - for the benefit of patients.

Defensive medicine: A symptom of uncertainty?

Defensive medicine is a well-documented phenomenon and refers to the practice of over-cautious management of patients, leading to excessive clinical activity such as over-investigation, unnecessary appointments and additional interventions. Adopting this approach is not in the best interest of patients and can lead to clinical reasoning being replaced by lists, guidelines and algorithms which do not consider the complexity of a patients presentation or the reasoning inherent in good clinical judgement. The drivers of defensive medicine are varied and include a high level of uncertainty alongside other factors including clinical experience with past cases, system pressures and patient expectations. This paper explores these drivers and considers strategies on how best to avoid a defensive medicine approach. It reinforces the need to adopt a patient centred focus and use sound clinical reasoning to support the management of patients.