Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Proactive risk management: a game-changer in preventing physician burnout

Howard Smith, MD
Physician
May 12, 2023
Share
Tweet
Share

Readers familiar with my earlier posts understand that I believe nothing causes physician burnout more than the threat of a lawsuit. The risk for any doctor is 5% per year; hence, a malpractice suit is inevitable for every 20 years in practice. The common denominator is a complication from which no doctor has immunity.

Those who deny ever being sued are either not practicing long enough or the complication has little settlement value. It is not superior communication skills that protect them. When an unhappy patient with a suspicion of fault has a complication, a request for medical records from an attorney is not far behind. Merit aside, if the complication has a settlement value for the attorney, the game is on.

Anything a doctor does afterward is reactive. Anything done when the complication occurs is proactive. It is due diligence to investigate a complication. This does not prevent the lawsuit, but risk management gains control of it.

Risk management has four steps.

Collate. Divide the standard of care and the medical intervention into ten corresponding phases: 1. Presentation phase, 2. Investigation phase, 3, Interpretation phase, 4. Diagnostic phase, 5. Discrimination phase, 6. Informed consent phase, 7. Selection phase, 8. Technical phase, 9. Resolution phase and 10. Discharge phase.

A) Standard of care: Each phase in the standard of care is the benchmark for excellence. Because excellence is never a medical error, any adverse outcome associated with the standard of care can only result from an error of nature.

B) Medical intervention: Each phase in the medical intervention is the actual performance. An adverse outcome can occur from a medical error or from an error of nature. If performance departs from standards of care, the complication is, more likely than not, a medical error.

Compare. Contrast each phase in the standard of care to its counterpart in the medical intervention. The data to make this distinction are:

A) The background risk (µ): It is the population mean for an error of nature. An error-of-nature results from all causes in the universe other than the medical error in question. The background risk is the sine qua non for the standard of care.

B) The observed risk (OR): Actual performance in any phase of the medical intervention produces an outcome having an observed risk. An observed risk greater than the background risk is the sine qua non for a medical error.

C) Risk of harm (ROH): Risk of harm is the relative risk between counterparts and is the proximate cause of a complication. Observed risk is ROH x background risk.

a. If there is no difference, the ROH is 1.0, and the observed risk equals the background risk.

b. If there is a difference, the ROH is greater than 1.0, and the observed risk is greater than the background risk.

c. When repeated for each phase of the medical intervention, there is a sample of 10 observed risks. Some are equal to the background risk; others are greater than the background risk.

D) The burden of proof: The comparison is made with a preponderance of the evidence, which is 50% probability plus a scintilla. Scintilla is generic, but in a scientific investigation, it is 45% (45% plus 50% probability equals 95% confidence, the standard in scientific inquiry).

Conclude. This step is hypothesis testing.

A) The two hypotheses:

a. Null hypothesis (Ho): If there is no statistically significant difference between the sample and the background risk, the medical intervention comports with standards of care.

b. Alternate hypothesis (Ha): If there is a statistically significant difference between the sample and the background risk, the medical intervention departs from standards of care.

B) The test: one sample t-test

a. The sample: The ten observed risks.

b. Level of significance, alpha (α) = 0.05: This corresponds to 95% confidence (50% confidence plus a scintilla of 45%).

c. Population mean, (µ) = background risk

C) The result – p-value:

a. If p ≥ α, retain the null hypothesis

b. If p < α, reject the null hypothesis, which sustains the alternate hypothesis by default.

Certify. The certified report is a sworn, notarized statement prepared by the doctor contemporaneous to the complication. It certifies that the medical intervention either comports with or departs from standards of care. If the null hypothesis is retained, there is 95% confidence that it is true. If the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternate hypothesis is sustained, there is still a 5% chance that the null hypothesis is true, and rejecting it is an error, called a type 1 error.

Once a certified report is prepared and distributed, risk management cannot be undone.

When submitted to the insurance carrier, even before a claim is made, actuaries are placed on notice and have the duty of due diligence.

When seen by defense counsel, the report serves as the framework for answers to the complaint and for opinions in the certificate of merit by the medical expert.

From my experience with the certified report, when the claim is frivolous, the doctor is dismissed with prejudice. If meritorious, the lawsuit is settled out of court.

How the certified report is accepted in the courtroom remains to be seen. When jurors understand that, for the defendant, scintilla is a well-defined 45% and, for the plaintiff, scintilla is just generic, it is common sense that 95% confidence is better than 50% plus a scintilla.

Plaintiff attorneys may move for the presiding judge to disqualify the certified report, arguing that it is too novel and, therefore, is inadmissible. How judges decide is unpredictable, but they know it is relevant, fair, unbiased, not wasteful, not hearsay, or not confidential.

From comments to earlier posts, some readers are outraged when litigation goes too far. Others are outraged when litigation does not go far enough. This post is an objective answer. Risk management offers a tangible solution for both. I hope it is appreciated in this spirit.

Howard Smith is an obstetrics-gynecology physician.

Prev

The deadly consequences of a shortage: The Pluvicto crisis leaves metastatic prostate cancer patients in limbo

May 12, 2023 Kevin 0
…
Next

Discover the surprising lessons of being a terrible patient: How it made me a better doctor

May 12, 2023 Kevin 1
…

Tagged as: Malpractice

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The deadly consequences of a shortage: The Pluvicto crisis leaves metastatic prostate cancer patients in limbo
Next Post >
Discover the surprising lessons of being a terrible patient: How it made me a better doctor

More by Howard Smith, MD

  • Navigating a malicious medical malpractice lawsuit: a case study

    Howard Smith, MD
  • Taking charge of your future by taking charge of medical malpractice suits

    Howard Smith, MD
  • Is chaos in health care leading us towards socialized medicine? How physician burnout is a catalyst.

    Howard Smith, MD

Related Posts

  • Chasing numbers contributes to physician burnout

    DrizzleMD
  • A physician’s addiction to social media

    Amanda Xi, MD
  • The risk physicians take when going on social media

    Anonymous
  • Despite physician burnout, medical schools are still hard to get into. Why is that?

    Suneel Dhand, MD
  • Physician burnout is as much a legal problem as it is a medical one

    Sharona Hoffman, JD
  • Physicians who don’t play the social media game may be left behind

    Xrayvsn, MD

More in Physician

  • Challenging the diagnosis: dehydration or bias?

    Sydney Lou Bonnick, MD
  • Practicing medicine with conviction

    Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA
  • The power of memory in shaping human identity

    Emily F. Peters and Sandeep Jauhar, MD, PhD
  • Physicians have no autonomy. Here’s how to change that.

    Diane W. Shannon, MD, MPH
  • The erosion of patient care

    Laura de la Torre, MD
  • Navigating adulthood in the digital age

    Eleanor Menzin, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Reigniting after burnout: 3 physician stories

      Kim Downey, PT | Physician
    • The erosion of patient care

      Laura de la Torre, MD | Physician
    • Challenging the diagnosis: dehydration or bias?

      Sydney Lou Bonnick, MD | Physician
    • Inside the grueling life of a surgery intern

      Randall S. Fong, MD | Physician
    • 1 in 5 doctors will become disabled. Are you prepared?

      Amarish Dave, DO | Finance
    • Misinformed claims and the offensiveness of discrediting COVID-19 vaccine development

      Angel Garcia Otano, MD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Medical gaslighting: a growing challenge in today’s medical landscape

      Tami Burdick | Conditions
    • I want to be a doctor who can provide care for women: What states must I rule out for my medical education?

      Nandini Erodula | Education
    • Balancing opioid medication in chronic pain

      L. Joseph Parker, MD | Conditions
    • Reigniting after burnout: 3 physician stories

      Kim Downey, PT | Physician
    • Mourning the silent epidemic: the physician suicide crisis and suggestions for change

      Amna Shabbir, MD | Physician
    • I’m a doctor, and I almost died during childbirth

      Bayo Curry-Winchell, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Challenging the diagnosis: dehydration or bias?

      Sydney Lou Bonnick, MD | Physician
    • The art of pediatrics: Connecting through observation

      Alexander Rakowsky, MD | Conditions
    • Assertiveness in health care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Epigenetics and our inheritance to future generations

      Vishruth Nagam | Conditions
    • Practicing medicine with conviction

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • The power of memory in shaping human identity

      Emily F. Peters and Sandeep Jauhar, MD, PhD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 3 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • MedPod Today: Big Medical Bill; GLP-1 Agonist Plateau; Grateful Patient Fundraising
  • Spouting COVID Misinformation Tied to Use of Ivermectin, HCQ
  • Senator Dianne Feinstein Dies at 90
  • No Benefit to Tight Glucose Control in ICU
  • New Option OK'd for Pompe Disease

Meeting Coverage

  • New Schizophrenia Treatments Are Coming: Don't Panic
  • Loneliness Needs to Be Treated Like Any Other Health Condition, Researcher Suggests
  • Stopping Medical Misinformation Requires Early Detection
  • AI Has an Image Problem in Healthcare, Expert Says
  • Want Better Health Outcomes? Check Out What Other Countries Do
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Reigniting after burnout: 3 physician stories

      Kim Downey, PT | Physician
    • The erosion of patient care

      Laura de la Torre, MD | Physician
    • Challenging the diagnosis: dehydration or bias?

      Sydney Lou Bonnick, MD | Physician
    • Inside the grueling life of a surgery intern

      Randall S. Fong, MD | Physician
    • 1 in 5 doctors will become disabled. Are you prepared?

      Amarish Dave, DO | Finance
    • Misinformed claims and the offensiveness of discrediting COVID-19 vaccine development

      Angel Garcia Otano, MD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Medical gaslighting: a growing challenge in today’s medical landscape

      Tami Burdick | Conditions
    • I want to be a doctor who can provide care for women: What states must I rule out for my medical education?

      Nandini Erodula | Education
    • Balancing opioid medication in chronic pain

      L. Joseph Parker, MD | Conditions
    • Reigniting after burnout: 3 physician stories

      Kim Downey, PT | Physician
    • Mourning the silent epidemic: the physician suicide crisis and suggestions for change

      Amna Shabbir, MD | Physician
    • I’m a doctor, and I almost died during childbirth

      Bayo Curry-Winchell, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Challenging the diagnosis: dehydration or bias?

      Sydney Lou Bonnick, MD | Physician
    • The art of pediatrics: Connecting through observation

      Alexander Rakowsky, MD | Conditions
    • Assertiveness in health care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Epigenetics and our inheritance to future generations

      Vishruth Nagam | Conditions
    • Practicing medicine with conviction

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • The power of memory in shaping human identity

      Emily F. Peters and Sandeep Jauhar, MD, PhD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Proactive risk management: a game-changer in preventing physician burnout
3 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...