Literature DB >> 28346582

Rates and Characteristics of Paid Malpractice Claims Among US Physicians by Specialty, 1992-2014.

Adam C Schaffer1, Anupam B Jena2, Seth A Seabury3, Harnam Singh4, Venkat Chalasani4, Allen Kachalia1.   

Abstract

Importance: Although physician concerns about medical malpractice are substantial, national data are lacking on the rate of claims paid on behalf of US physicians by specialty. Objective: To characterize paid malpractice claims by specialty. Design, Setting, and Participants: A comprehensive analysis was conducted of all paid malpractice claims, with linkage to physician specialty, from the National Practitioner Data Bank from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2014, a period including an estimated 19.9 million physician-years. All dollar amounts were inflation adjusted to 2014 dollars using the Consumer Price Index. The dates on which this analysis was performed were from May 1, 2015, to February 20, 2016, and from October 25 to December 16, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: For malpractice claims (n = 280 368) paid on behalf of physicians (in aggregate and by specialty): rates per physician-year, mean compensation amounts, the concentration of paid claims among a limited number of physicians, the proportion of paid claims that were greater than $1 million, severity of injury, and type of malpractice alleged.
Results: From 1992-1996 to 2009-2014, the rate of paid claims decreased by 55.7% (from 20.1 to 8.9 per 1000 physician-years; P < .001), ranging from a 13.5% decrease in cardiology (from 15.6 to 13.5 per 1000 physician-years; P = .15) to a 75.8% decrease in pediatrics (from 9.9 to 2.4 per 1000 physician-years; P < .001). The mean compensation payment was $329 565. The mean payment increased by 23.3%, from $286 751 in 1992-1996 to $353 473 in 2009-2014 (P < .001). The increases ranged from $17 431 in general practice (from $218 350 in 1992-1996 to $235 781 in 2009-2014; P = .36) to $114 410 in gastroenterology (from $276 128 in 1992-1996 to $390 538 in 2009-2014; P < .001) and $138 708 in pathology (from $335 249 in 1992-1996 to $473 957 in 2009-2014; P = .005). Of 280 368 paid claims, 21 271 (7.6%) exceeded $1 million (4304 of 69 617 [6.2%] in 1992-1996 and 4322 of 54 081 [8.0%] in 2009-2014), and 32.1% (35 293 of 109 865) involved a patient death. Diagnostic error was the most common type of allegation, present in 31.8% (35 349 of 111 066) of paid claims, ranging from 3.5% in anesthesiology (153 of 4317) to 87.0% in pathology (915 of 1052). Conclusions and Relevance: Between 1992 and 2014, the rate of malpractice claims paid on behalf of physicians in the United States declined substantially. Mean compensation amounts and the percentage of paid claims exceeding $1 million increased, with wide differences in rates and characteristics across specialties. A better understanding of the causes of variation among specialties in paid malpractice claims may help reduce both patient injury and physicians' risk of liability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28346582      PMCID: PMC5470361          DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0311

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Intern Med        ISSN: 2168-6106            Impact factor:   21.873


  29 in total

1.  Physicians' fears of malpractice lawsuits are not assuaged by tort reforms.

Authors:  Emily R Carrier; James D Reschovsky; Michelle M Mello; Ralph C Mayrell; David Katz
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Prevalence and Characteristics of Physicians Prone to Malpractice Claims.

Authors:  David M Studdert; Marie M Bismark; Michelle M Mello; Harnam Singh; Matthew J Spittal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Claims, errors, and compensation payments in medical malpractice litigation.

Authors:  David M Studdert; Michelle M Mello; Atul A Gawande; Tejal K Gandhi; Allen Kachalia; Catherine Yoon; Ann Louise Puopolo; Troyen A Brennan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-05-11       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Medical professional liability risk among US cardiologists.

Authors:  Sandeep Mangalmurti; Seth A Seabury; Amitabh Chandra; Darius Lakdawalla; William J Oetgen; Anupam B Jena
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 4.749

5.  Paid malpractice claims for adverse events in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Authors:  Tara F Bishop; Andrew M Ryan; Andrew K Ryan; Lawrence P Casalino
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  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

7.  Catastrophic medical malpractice payouts in the United States.

Authors:  Paul J Bixenstine; Andrew D Shore; Winta T Mehtsun; Andrew M Ibrahim; Julie A Freischlag; Martin A Makary
Journal:  J Healthc Qual       Date:  2013-03-29       Impact factor: 1.095

8.  Malpractice risk among US pediatricians.

Authors:  Anupam B Jena; Amitabh Chandra; Seth A Seabury
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment.

Authors:  David M Studdert; Michelle M Mello; William M Sage; Catherine M DesRoches; Jordon Peugh; Kinga Zapert; Troyen A Brennan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-06-01       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  The supply of renal physicians: an analysis of data from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile.

Authors:  P R Kletke; W D Marder
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 8.860

View more
  25 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic error and neuro-ophthalmology.

Authors:  Leanne Stunkel; Nancy J Newman; Valérie Biousse
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 5.710

2.  Improving HRSA Programs Through Research and Evaluation.

Authors:  Anne Dievler; Sylvia K Fisher
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 2.792

Review 3.  Updates in medical professional liability: a primer for electrophysiologists.

Authors:  Christopher Austin; Fred Kusumoto
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  Low confidence levels with the robotic platform among senior surgical residents: simulation training is needed.

Authors:  Francisco Schlottmann; Jason M Long; Sean Brown; Marco G Patti
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-08-11

5.  Litigation Following Carpal Tunnel Release.

Authors:  Nishant Ganesh Kumar; Nicholas Hricz; Brian C Drolet
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2018-03-13

6.  Characteristics of State and Federal Malpractice Litigation of Medical Liability Claims for Keratinocyte Carcinoma, 1968 to 2018.

Authors:  Raghav Tripathi; Harib H Ezaldein; Krithika Rajkumar; Jeremy S Bordeaux; Jeffrey F Scott
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 10.282

7.  Characteristics of Medical Liability Claims Against Dermatologists From 1991 Through 2015.

Authors:  Heather Kornmehl; Sanminder Singh; Brandon L Adler; Alexander E Wolf; Dean A Bochner; April W Armstrong
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 10.282

8.  Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Involving Anesthesiology Residents: An Analysis of the National Westlaw Database.

Authors:  Feel G Kang; Mark C Kendall; Ji S Kang; Christopher J Malgieri; Gildasio S De Oliveira
Journal:  J Educ Perioper Med       Date:  2020-10-01

9.  Medico-Legal Cases Involving Cardiologists and Cardiac Test Underuse or Overuse.

Authors:  Lisa A Calder; Heather K Neilson; Eileen M Whyte; Jun Ji; R Sacha Bhatia
Journal:  CJC Open       Date:  2020-12-01

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

Authors:  Linda J Titus; Lisa M Reisch; Anna N A Tosteson; Heidi D Nelson; Paul D Frederick; Patricia A Carney; Raymond L Barnhill; David E Elder; Martin A Weinstock; Michael W Piepkorn; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 2.493

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.