"Fear of erratic jury decisions in medical malpractice cases has spawned a culture of fear"

Philip K. Howard, of Common Good, writes an opinion piece, published in the WSJ:

Any sick person who gets sicker can drag a doctor through years of litigation — an average of five years to resolve a claim. A jury can render a verdict that bears no relation to accepted medical standards or, indeed, the results of prior cases. It is not that most juries are unwise: Overall, according to a recent Harvard study, the error rate in this system is about 25%. But playing Russian roulette with one bullet in four chambers is not a source of comfort to most doctors. Meanwhile, payment to patients who deserve it may take years, with the attorney taking up to 40% of the award.

The direct costs of the malpractice system, about $28 billion a year, are only the tip of the iceberg. Defensive medicine — the practice of ordering the procedures and tests that are not clinically indicated — is ubiquitous, according to a recent study in Pennsylvania, practiced by over 90% of physicians. It’s hard to calculate the total cost of defensive medicine, but estimates start at the tens of billions and go up from there.

Related posts:

1. Physicians don’t trust the malpractice system and why doctors order too many tests
2. Medical malpractice verdicts
3. Health care today: Payment and fear of malpractice takes priority
4. How malpractice cases affect physicians emotionally
5. The worst medical malpractice cases you can possibly imagine
6. How malpractice attorneys decide which cases to accept
7. Medical malpractice reform by President Obama and the White House

  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe

Tagged as: malpractice, patient