[Medical overuse, defensive medicine and new reform of professional mistake].

Reflecting on the inappropriateness (medical overuse) and on defensive medicine, the Authors wonder whether the new Italian reform of professional guilt, desired at all institutional levels, will actually contain the high economic costs produced by these large and widespread phenomena. After having characterized the medical overuse and the defensive medicine indicating the common traits and main differences, the reflection is conducted by exploring the many scientific evidence that does not document any causal link between the decriminalization of professional conduct and the containment of the costs produced by the prescriptive inappropriateness. They conclude by stating that, for their containment, a third reform of professional liability will not be helpful. Instead, it must focus on other issues, mainly addressing the excessive reliance on judicial recourse. It should provide for mandatory out-of-court conciliatory mechanisms and clarifying the protective umbrella of the doctor's non-criminality.

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.

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.

A qualitative interview study of Australian physicians on defensive practice and low value care: "it's easier to talk about our fear of lawyers than to talk about our fear of looking bad in front of each other".

BACKGROUND: Defensive practice occurs when physicians provide services, such as tests, treatments and referrals, mainly to reduce their perceived legal or reputational risks, rather than to advance patient care. This behaviour is counter to physicians' ethical responsibilities, yet is widely reported in surveys of doctors in various countries. There is a lack of qualitative research on the drivers of defensive practice, which is needed to inform strategies to prevent this ethically problematic behaviour. METHODS: A qualitative interview study investigated the views and experiences of physicians in Australia on defensive practice and its contribution to low value care. Interviewees were recruited based on interest in medico-legal issues or experience in a health service involved in 'Choosing Wisely' initiatives. Semi-structured interviews averaged 60 min in length. Data were coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework, which encapsulates theories of behaviour and behaviour change. RESULTS: All participants (n = 17) perceived defensive practice as a problem and a contributor to low value care. Behavioural drivers of defensive practice spanned seven domains in the TDF: knowledge, focused on inadequate knowledge of the law and the risks of low value care; skills, emphasising patient communication and clinical decision-making skills; professional role and identity, particularly clinicians' perception of patient expectations and concern for their professional reputation; beliefs about consequences, especially perceptions of the beneficial and harmful consequences of defensive practice; environmental context and resources, including processes for handling patient complaints; social influences, focused on group norms that encourage or discourage defensive behaviour; and emotions, especially fear of missing a diagnosis. Overall, defensive practice is motivated by physicians' desire to avoid criticism or scrutiny from a range of sources, and censure from their professional peers can be a more potent driver than perceived legal consequences. CONCLUSIONS: The findings call for strengthening knowledge and skills, for example, to improve clinicians' understanding of the law and their awareness of the risks of low value care and using effective communication strategies with patients. Importantly, supportive cultures of practice and organisational environments are needed to create conditions in which clinicians feel confident in avoiding defensive practice and other forms of low value care.

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.

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.

Emergency Physician Practice Changes After Being Named in a Malpractice Claim.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Malpractice fear is a commonly cited cause for defensive medicine, but it is unclear whether being named in a malpractice claim changes physician practice patterns. We study whether there are changes in commonly used measures of emergency physician practice after being named in a malpractice claim. METHODS: We performed a retrospective difference-in-differences study comparing practice patterns of emergency physicians named in a malpractice claim and unnamed matched controls working contemporaneously in the same emergency departments (EDs), using data from a national emergency medicine management group (59 EDs in 11 US states from 2010 to 2015). We studied aggregate measures of care intensity (hospital admission rate and relative value units/visit), studied care speed (relative value units/hour and discharged patients' length of stay), and assessed patient experience (monthly physician Press Ganey percentile rank). RESULTS: A total of 65 emergency physicians named in at least 1 malpractice claim and 140 matched controls met inclusion criteria. After the malpractice claim filing date, there were no significant changes in measures of care intensity or speed. However, named emergency physicians' patient experience scores improved immediately after the malpractice claim filing date and showed sustained improvements by 6.52 Press Ganey percentile ranks (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 12.38), with the increase most prominent among those involved in the 46 failure-to-diagnose claims (10.52; 95% confidence interval 3.72 to 17.32). CONCLUSION: We observed a temporal improvement in patient satisfaction scores for emergency physicians in this sample after their being named in a malpractice claim relative to matched controls. Measures of care intensity and speed did not significantly change.

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.

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.

The impact of tort reform on defensive medicine, quality of care, and physician supply: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of tort reform on defensive medicine, quality of care, and physician supply. DATA SOURCES: Empirical, peer-reviewed English-language studies in the MEDLINE and HeinOnline databases that evaluated the association between tort reform and our study outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Title and abstract screening was followed by full-text screening of relevant citations. We created evidence tables, grouped studies by outcome, and qualitatively compared the findings of included studies. We assigned a higher rating to study designs that controlled for unobservable sources of confounding. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Thirty-seven studies met screening criteria. Caps on damages, collateral-source rule reform, and joint-and-several liability reform were the most common types of tort reform evaluated in the included studies. We found that caps on noneconomic damages were associated with a decrease in defensive medicine, increase in physician supply, and decrease in health care spending, but had no effect on quality of care. Other reform approaches did not have a clear or consistent impact on study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that traditional tort reform methods may not be sufficient for health reform and policy makers should evaluate and incorporate newer approaches.

Rethinking the Obvious: Time for New Ideas on Medical Malpractice Tort Reform.

States have engaged in medical malpractice litigation reforms over the past 30 years to reduce malpractice insurance premiums, increase the supply of physicians, reduce the cost of health care, and increase efficiency. These reforms have included caps on noneconomic damages and legal procedural changes. Despite these reforms, health care costs in the United States remain among the highest in the world, provider shortages remain, and defensive medicine practices persist. The purpose of this study was to determine how successful traditional medical malpractice reforms have been at controlling medical costs, decreasing defensive medicine practices, lowering malpractice premiums, and reducing the frequency of medical malpractice litigation. Research has shown that direct reforms and aggressive damage caps have had the most significant impact on lowering malpractice premiums and increasing physician supply. Out of the metrics that were improved by malpractice reforms, similar improvements were shown because of quality reform measures. While traditional tort reforms have shown some targeted improvement, large-scale, system-wide change has not been realized, and thus it is time to consider alternative reforms.

Overdiagnosis and overimaging: an ethical issue for radiological protection.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyse the key factors that influence the overimaging using X-ray such as self-referral, defensive medicine and duplicate imaging studies and to emphasize the ethical problem that derives from it. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we focused on the more frequent sources of overdiagnosis such as the total-body CT, proposed in the form of screening in both public and private sector, the choice of the most sensitive test for each pathology such as pulmonary embolism, ultrasound investigations mostly of the thyroid and of the prostate and MR examinations, especially of the musculoskeletal system. RESULTS: The direct follow of overdiagnosis and overimaging is the increase in the risk of contrast media infusion, radiant damage, and costs in the worldwide healthcare system. The theme of the costs of overdiagnosis is strongly related to inappropriate or poorly appropriate imaging examination. CONCLUSIONS: We underline the ethical imperatives of trust and right conduct, because the major ethical problems in radiology emerge in the justification of medical exposures of patients in the practice. A close cooperation and collaboration across all the physicians responsible for patient care in requiring imaging examination is also important, balancing possible ionizing radiation disadvantages and patient benefits in terms of care.

Perspectives on Patient Safety and Medical Malpractice: A Comparison of Medical and Legal Systems in Italy and the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Italy is experiencing a crisis of malpractice litigation with important repercussions on the insurance industry (e.g., lower profits), physicians (e.g., defensive medicine), and the courts (e.g., work backlog, lengthy proceedings). We searched for common ground between legal systems in Italy and the United States and considered the implications for international collaborations in patient safety. METHODS: We examined the judicial frameworks of medical malpractice litigation in two countries with different legal foundations: the United States (a public-private system governed by common law) and Italy (a publicly financed healthcare system governed by civil law). RESULTS: We found important differences and similarities across the two systems that suggest a high compatibility for future comparisons and collaborations. Although many Italian hospitals maintain risk management programs, the U.S. emphasis on patient safety and quality has not yet been integrated into Italian healthcare systems. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we propose that the Italian system might benefit from assertively adopting some concepts from the U.S. system. In particular, we consider the role of the law and Italian medicolegal experts as key facilitators for the integration of patient safety and risk management units within Italian healthcare facilities.

Effect of Increasing Malpractice Insurance Cost and Subsequent Practice of Defensive Medicine on Out-of-Hospital Birth Rates in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Across the United States, the burden of malpractice litigation has influenced obstetricians and obstetric institutions to avoid high-risk patients, favor cesarean delivery, and decrease availability of trial of labor after cesarean. Recently, the United States has experienced an increase in out-of-hospital (OOH) births. OBJECTIVE: The main purpose of this article is to investigate the association between malpractice insurance premium (MIP) and OOH births in the United States from 2000 to 2014. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed changes in OOH birth rates and MIP from 2000 to 2014 using birth data from the National Vital Statistics System and Medical Liability Monitor's annual survey, respectively. The change in OOH birth rates was then compared with the change in MIP. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2014, there has been approximately 60% increase in MIP from national average of $40,949 to $65,210 (p < 0.05). OOH births increased 57% from 39,398 births to 59,674 births (p < 0.05). There was a significant positive correlation between increase in MIP and increase in OOH births (p < 0.05, R 2 = 0.14). CONCLUSION: MIP and OOH birth rates have a significantly associated increase from 2000 to 2014. Given that malpractice climate affects other aspects of obstetric practice, we cautiously propose that increasing MIP may be associated with an increase in OOH births.

Challenges of New Healthcare Reform Act 2017 and Possible Rise of Defensive Medicine in Nepal.

Hippocratic oath, written 4th or 5th century BC, is still the binding mantra for physicians, which swears to fulfill to the best of one's ability and judgement, and treat sick human beings not just illness. But with changing health trends in southeast Asia region, there is a dramatic shift in patients and patients' party expectations regarding treatment, recovery, complications, and death. Such expectations havelead to violence against physicians and shift towards alternative medical practice. This article explores the possible rise of defensive medicine and its broader implications in health care system in Nepal with regard to the new 'Muluki Aparadh Samhita Ain 2074/Criminal (Code) Act 2017'. Keywords: Changing health; criminal act; defensive medicine; muluki ain, Nepal.

Young dentists: breaking the silence.

Now is the time for young dentists to voice their concerns - to ensure policy-makers understand problems faced by the dental workforce of tomorrow. This opinion article highlights the pertinent factors which have reduced young dentists to provide defensive dentistry provided in a far from ideal NHS environment.