Literature DB >> 23990265

Spinal-related malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA-rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse judgments, and average payments.

Stephen R Baker1, Valdis Lelkes, Ronak H Patel, Alejandro Castro, Uzair Sarmast, Jeremy Whang.   

Abstract

To present overall rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse settlements to the radiologists, and average payments to the plaintiff in spinal-related malpractice suits in a survey of 8,265 radiologists. The malpractice histories of 8,265 radiologists from 36 states were evaluated from credentialing data required of all radiologists participating in the network of One Call Medical Incorporated, a broker for CT/MR in workmen's compensation cases. Two hundred twenty-six of the 8,265 radiologists (31.5 %) had at least one suit. Of the 4,741 total claims, 627 (13.2 %) were related to the bones and adjacent soft tissue. Two hundred and ten (32.9 %) involved the spine. Of these, 70.2 % (134/191) were settled in favor of the plaintiff. One hundred and sixteen (68.2 %) involved the cervical spine with an average settlement of $483,156. Lumbar cases accounted for 28 (16.5 %) of spinal suits, with an average settlement of $119,272. Thoracic cases (26) accounted for only 15.3 % of spinal cases and had an average settlement of $481,608. An allegation of spinal malpractice resulting in a settlement or judgment against the radiologist occurred at a rate of 29.5 cases per 1,000 radiologists' person years. Of the three spinal regions, the cervical spine was the most frequent anatomic site of a malpractice suit and among all those cases settled incurred the highest payment in judgment to the plaintiff.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23990265     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-013-1150-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  8 in total

1.  Epidemiology of incident spinal fracture in a complete population.

Authors:  R Hu; C A Mustard; C Burns
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The current medical liability insurance crisis: detailed findings from two ACR surveys in 2003 and 2004.

Authors:  Yasmin S Cypel; Jonathan H Sunshine; Paul H Ellenbogen
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation.

Authors:  L Berlin; J W Berlin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Malpractice risk according to physician specialty.

Authors:  Anupam B Jena; Seth Seabury; Darius Lakdawalla; Amitabh Chandra
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  The need for multidisciplinary management of patients with upper thoracic spine fractures caused by high-velocity impact: a review of 32 surgically stabilised cases.

Authors:  J F Quinlan; J A Harty; J M O'Byrne
Journal:  J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.118

6.  The causes of medical malpractice suits against radiologists in the United States.

Authors:  Jeremy S Whang; Stephen R Baker; Ronak Patel; Lyndon Luk; Alejandro Castro
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  The demography of medical malpractice suits against radiologists.

Authors:  Stephen R Baker; Jeremy S Whang; Lyndon Luk; Kim S Clarkin; Alejandro Castro; Ronak Patel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Prevalence of facet joint pain in chronic spinal pain of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions.

Authors:  Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Mark V Boswell; Vijay Singh; Vidyasagar Pampati; Kim S Damron; Carla D Beyer
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2004-05-28       Impact factor: 2.362

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Medical disciplinary jurisprudence in alleged malpractice in radiology: 10-year Dutch experience.

Authors:  Robert M Kwee; Thomas C Kwee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 5.315

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.