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.

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.

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.

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.

The fine line of defensive medicine.

Defensive medicine is a practice that has been utilized by clinicians in efforts of preventing patient dissatisfaction and malpractice claims and may be done through either omission or commission. As much as 57% of physicians have disclosed that they practice defensive medicine. However, this practice does not necessarily prevent malpractice claims and more importantly, neither does it equate to good medical practice, with some leading to poor outcomes. Unfortunately, there is a high percentage of malpractice claims lodged against clinicians in both primary care and hospital settings. Specialists such as surgeons, obstetricians, and gynecologists face the highest claims. In particular, during the SARS CoV-2 pandemic, with new challenges and limited treatment algorithms, there is an even greater concern for possible bourgeoning claims. Counteracting defensive medicine can be accomplished through decriminalizing malpractice claims, leaving physician oversight up to state medical boards and hospital claims management committees. Additional tort reform measures must also be taken such as caps on noneconomic damages to ensure emphasis on beneficence and nonmaleficence. Once these are in place, it may well serve to increase clinician-patient trust and improve patient independence in the shared decision-making process of their treatment, allowing clinicians to practice their full scope of practice without feeling wary of potential malpractice claims.

Physicians' views and experiences of defensive medicine: An international review of empirical research.

This study systematically maps empirical research on physicians' views and experiences of hedging-type defensive medicine, which involves providing services (eg, tests, referrals) to reduce perceived legal risks. Such practices drive over-treatment and low value healthcare. Data sources were empirical, English-language publications in health, legal and multi-disciplinary databases. The extraction framework covered: where and when the research was conducted; what methods of data collection were used; who the study participants were; and what were the study aims, main findings in relation to hedging-type defensive practices, and proposed solutions. 79 papers met inclusion criteria. Defensive medicine has mainly been studied in the United States and European countries using quantitative surveys. Surgery and obstetrics have been key fields of investigation. Hedging-type practices were commonly reported, including: ordering unnecessary tests, treatments and referrals; suggesting invasive procedures against professional judgment; ordering hospitalisation or delaying discharge; and excessive documentation in medical records. Defensive practice was often framed around the threat of negligence lawsuits, but studies recognised other legal risks, including patient complaints and regulatory investigations. Potential solutions to defensive medicine were identified at macro (law, policy), meso (organisation, profession) and micro (physician) levels. Areas for future research include qualitative studies to investigate the behavioural drivers of defensive medicine and intervention research to determine policies and practices that work to support clinicians in de-implementing defensive, low-value care.

Impact of malpractice liability among spine surgeons: A national survey of French private neurosurgeons.

PURPOSE: In the general context of medical judicialization, spine surgeons are impacted by the part that medical responsibility and the risk of malpractice play in their actions and decisions. Our aim was to evaluate possible shifts in practices among private neurosurgeons who are highly exposed to this judicial risk and detect alterations in their pleasure in exercising their profession. We present the first national survey on French physicians' perception of surgical judicialization and consequences on their practice. METHODS: An online survey was submitted to the 121 members of the French Society of Private Neurosurgery, who represent 29.1% of the total number of spine surgeons and perform 36.0% of the national total spine surgery activity. The French law (no-fault out-of-court scheme) significantly impacts these surgeons in the event of litigation. RESULTS: A total of 78 surveys were completed (64.5% response rate): 89.7% of respondents experienced alteration of doctor-patient relationship related to judicialization and 60.2% had already refused to perform risky surgeries. Fear of being sued added negative pressure during surgery for 55.1% of respondents and 37.2% of them had already considered stopping their practice because of this litigation context. CONCLUSION: The increasing impact of medical liability is prompting practitioners to change their practice and perceptions. The doctor-patient relationship appears to be altered, negative pressure is placed on physicians and defensively, some neurosurgeons may refuse high-risk patients and procedures. This situation causes professional disenchantment and can ultimately prove disadvantageous for both doctors and patients.

Polypharmacy: the whys, the so whats and the what nexts.

There is an increasing awareness that polypharmacy - the use of multiple medicines by one individual - may bring harm as well as benefit. This has been termed 'problematic polypharmacy' and is associated with increased risk of admission to hospital, decreased quality of life and psychological harm. This article addresses the factors that may be contributing to the global rise of polypharmacy (the whys), the problems it can cause (the so whats), and some opportunities and strategies for improving and avoiding problematic polypharmacy in the future (the what nexts).

'Defensive medicine among different surgical disciplines: A descriptive cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The term defensive medicine refers to medical behaviors that avoid physician liability without providing increased benefits to the patient. High rates of defensive medicine ranging from 54% to 98% have been reported in different countries. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the defensive medicine knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of physicians working in the surgical departments of a Turkish university hospital. METHODS: All 220 physicians working at the Atatürk University Hospital were invited to participate in this cross-sectional study. Responses from 190 participants were analyzed. Data were collected by face-to-face interview using six demographic questions and the Defensive Medicine Behavior Scale. RESULTS: The frequency of application of at least one positive or negative aspect of defensive medicine was 94.2% (n = 179). The highest Defensive Medicine Behavior Scale scores were among participants from the pediatric surgery department (median: 43.0, IQR: 4.0). Factors affecting Defensive Medicine Behavior Scale scores were academic title, specialty, and a history of lawsuits because of malpractice. A history of medical malpractice litigation was encountered among 24.7% of participants (n = 47). CONCLUSION: This study determined high rates of defensive medicine among physicians. Defensive medicine can harm patients, physicians, and also the healthcare system. Efforts should be made to keep health worker anxiety and risk perception in balance in order to prevent defensive medicine.

Responsabilidad Médica en Chile: Fallos de la Corte Suprema de Justicia 2017 / Medical Malpractice in Chile: Rulings of the Supreme Court of Justice 2017

RESUMEN: El objetivo de este trabajo fue analizar los datos epidemiológicos y jurídicos de los casos por responsabilidad médica fallados por la Corte Suprema de Justicia chilena (CSJ) el año 2017, para relevar los escenarios de alto riesgo, aportando a su prevención. Se realizó un estudio retrospectivo, revisando los fallos de la CSJ en la base de datos electrónica del Poder Judicial chileno. Se seleccionaron y analizaron los fallos por responsabilidad médica. Se detectó un total de 61 casos por responsabilidad médica que alcanzaron la CSJ en 2017. Todos correspondieron a causas civiles. La duración promedio de los juicios fue 41,9 meses. La especialidad más demandada y condenada fue ginecología. La mayoría de las demandas y condenas afectó al Sistema Público de salud. Los casos que dan origen a las demandas son, en su mayoría, de atención de urgencias por sobre las programadas, y de tratamiento por sobre procedimientos quirúrgicos. El 54,8 % de los casos resultaron en la muerte del paciente. La mitad de los fallos condenatorios involucraba el fallecimiento del usuario afectado. Se deben investigar los factores de riesgo no sólo de la ocurrencia de mal-praxis, si no de la judicialización de los conflictos médico-paciente, especialmente en el área gineco-obstétrica, incluyendo los casos de instancias anteriores a la CSJ. Se debe investigar así mismo los factores de riesgo para la mayor propensión de los profesionales de sexo masculino de ser demandados y condenados por malpraxis médica.

ABSTRACT: The objective of the present study is to characterize the epidemiologic and juridical data for medical malpractice cases ruled by the Chilean Supreme Court (CSC) in 2017, to highlight the high risk scenarios, as a contribution to their prevention. A search of the CSC electronic database was conducted to identify and analyze CSC rulings for medical malpractice cases. In this study 61 malpractice cases ruled by CSC were identified. The CSC received only civil cases of medical malpractices during the studied period. The average duration of the trial was 41.9 months. Gynecologists faced suits and received sentences more frequently than any other type of specialist. The majority of prosecuted cases and convictions were associated with the public health system. A greater number of claims were related to emergency care than with scheduled procedures. Likewise, more claims were associated with non-surgical treatment than with surgical procedures. 54.8 % of all cases resulted in the patient's death. Half of the cases that lead to conviction, were related to the death of a patient. Risk factors should be investigated, not only of the occurrence of malpractice, but also of the judicial process of doctor-patient conflicts, especially in the obstetrics and gynecology area, including the analysis of cases of prior judicial instances. The risk factors for the higher propensity of male professionals to be prosecuted and convicted for medical malpractice should also be investigated.

Triggers of defensive medical behaviours: a cross-sectional study among physicians in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether the attitudes of physicians towards justified and unjustified litigation, and their perception of patient pressure in demanding care, influence their use of defensive medical behaviours. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine litigation attitude and perceived patient pressure factors. Regression analyses were used to regress these factors on to the ordering of extra tests or procedures (defensive assurance behaviour) or the avoidance of high-risk patients or procedures (defensive avoidance behaviour). SETTING: Data were collected from eight Dutch hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents were 160 physicians and 54 residents (response rate 25%) of the hospital departments of (1) anaesthesiology, (2) colon, stomach and liver diseases, (3) gynaecology, (4) internal medicine, (5) neurology and (6) surgery. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Respondents' application of defensive assurance and avoidance behaviours. RESULTS: 'Disapproval of justified litigation' and 'Concerns about unjustified litigation' were positively related to both assurance (ß=0.21, p<0.01, and ß=0.28, p<0.001, respectively) and avoidance (ß=0.16, p<0.05, and ß=0.18, p<0.05, respectively) behaviours. 'Self-blame for justified litigation' was not significantly related to both defensive behaviours. Perceived patient pressures to refer (ß=0.18, p<0.05) and to prescribe medicine (ß=0.23, p<0.01) had direct positive relationships with assurance behaviour, whereas perceived patient pressure to prescribe medicine was also positively related to avoidance behaviour (ß=0.14, p<0.05). No difference was found between physicians and residents in their defensive medical behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians adopted more defensive medical behaviours if they had stronger thoughts and emotions towards (un)justified litigation. Further, physicians should be aware that perceived patient pressure for care can lead to them adopting defensive behaviours that negatively affects the quality and safety of patient care.

Educational Challenges of the Operating Room.

Resident education in the operating room and surgical resident autonomy represent two enormous challenges within cardiothoracic (CT) training programs. The goal of surgical educators and CT trainees is to ensure the graduating resident's ability to safely operate independently at the completion of training. The field has come a long way from the notion of see one, do one, teach one, which was once the norm. Cardiothoracic surgery continues to become more specialized and the patients more complex with greater scrutiny of outcomes. There are many challenges that are faced in contemporary CT training to make intraoperative teaching harder than ever.

Expert witness testimony step by step and how to prepare it.

The medical expert witness testimony is a key moment in the pathway of patient complaints as well as in the line of defense of the defendant-physician. For the defendant, it is a difficult time, often experienced as humiliating, because his or her competences are questioned, appraised and discussed in public. However, the defendant must perceive and use this encounter as an opportunity to express his/her viewpoint on the medical accident. This article provides the principal juridical rules that govern the medical expert witness testimony that must be known, as well as some practical advice on how the medical expert witness testimony evolves and how to protect oneself from the complaints, In order to enable the defendant to best prepare for this confrontation between the involved parties.

Malpractice Concerns, Defensive Medicine, and the Histopathology Diagnosis of Melanocytic Skin Lesions.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of malpractice concerns on pathologists' use of defensive medicine and interpretations of melanocytic skin lesions (MSLs) is unknown. METHODS: A total of 207 pathologists interpreting MSLs responded to a survey about past involvement in malpractice litigation, influence of malpractice concerns on diagnosis, and use of assurance behaviors (defensive medicine) to alleviate malpractice concerns. Assurance behaviors included requesting second opinions, additional slides, additional sampling, and ordering specialized tests. RESULTS: Of the pathologists, 27.5% reported that malpractice concerns influenced them toward a more severe MSL diagnosis. Nearly all (95.2%) pathologists reported practicing at least one assurance behavior due to malpractice concerns, and this practice was associated with being influenced toward a more severe MSL diagnosis (odds ratio, 2.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-5.26). CONCLUSIONS: One of four US skin pathologists upgrade MSL diagnosis due to malpractice concerns, and nearly all practice assurance behaviors. Assurance behaviors are associated with rendering a more severe MSL diagnosis.