China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Medical Liability Insurance Data Analytics
Published in Salvatore Volpe, Health Informatics, 2022
Since patients began suing health care practitioners, medical and legal data has been collected in methods and combinations peculiar to the process of defending the practitioner. While rules of procedure and evidence can differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, all medical malpractice lawsuits require a plaintiff to identify, with specificity, their allegations of how and when the defendant provider deviated from the standard of care, the nature and extent of injury, and how this damage is causally connected to the deviation. The defense is entitled to discovery testimony of the plaintiff patient which, along with other things, can identify the patient’s specific demographic, personal and familial health history, treatment history and specific, current health/injury status. This deposition testimony takes place after collection of all pertinent medical records from each potentially relevant provider, reviewed by the defendant practitioner’s attorney and, ideally, medical providers of the appropriate specialty. All this information is collected and stored, in some format, in a medical malpractice insurer’s claim file.
Medicolegal considerations
Published in Hung N. Winn, Frank A. Chervenak, Roberto Romero, Clinical Maternal-Fetal Medicine Online, 2021
Expert witnesses are employed by opposing parties of a malpractice claim. Physicians who accept both plaintiff and defense cases are thought to be less biased. Depending on individualized State Tort Law, an expert may render appropriate opinions by virtue of similar practice and does not need to practice an identical discipline of medicine. Nonetheless, the expert must have knowledge of the standard of care and be familiar with the locality of the case setting. A favorable expert is one who is active clinically. While it helps to be familiar with current literature, it is very important that they have an understanding of the standards of care during the time period that the case actually took place. Oftentimes, years, and even decades, have passed before a case is filed. Also it is important that experts understand the setting by region and facility and how these factors can impact the evidence of a case.
Elements of Case Analysis
Published in Julie Dickinson, Anne Meyer, Karen J. Huff, Deborah A. Wipf, Elizabeth K. Zorn, Kathy G. Ferrell, Lisa Mancuso, Marjorie Berg Pugatch, Joanne Walker, Karen Wilkinson, Legal Nurse Consulting Principles and Practices, 2019
Tonia Aiken, Phyllis ZaiKaner Miller, Marguerite Barbacci
Most malpractice cases take three to five years to resolve. Most plaintiff attorneys work on a contingency basis, meaning they do not make money unless the plaintiff receives a settlement or award. In a contingency practice, time is money. The firm may subsidize a case for a prolonged period before receiving any reimbursement of expenses, if ever. In the meantime, the cost of maintaining the practice continues. Furthermore, when a claim is not pursued, plaintiff attorneys working on a contingency basis make no money and absorb the costs incurred to investigate the claim. Therefore, timely and effective case analysis is economically imperative for plaintiff firms. For more information on the economics of plaintiff and defense firms, see Chapter 29.
Communication skills in primary care settings: aligning student and patient voices
Published in Education for Primary Care, 2023
Chandramani Thuraisingham, Siti Suriani Abd Razak, Vishna Devi Nadarajah, Norul Hidayah Mamat
Our study highlighted that socio-cultural differences can affect communication, the doctor-patient relationship, and ultimately patient outcomes. There are studies that show doctors behave less affectively and empathetically when interacting with ethnic minority patients [43]. In multi-ethnic societies, recognising this difference is crucial as patients prefer to speak in their own language, or they encounter difficulties in explicitly expressing themselves [44]. Both students and patients highlighted the importance of having a common language when communicating with one another. Patients’ level of education was perceived by students to influence their social behaviour which in turn impacted the way they were able to converse and comprehend information. Malpractice litigation against doctors has often arisen because of miscommunication [19].
Procedural Sedation by Non-Anesthesiologists: A Review of Malpractice Litigation
Published in Journal of Legal Medicine, 2022
Though this study includes just 25 cases, this does not imply that adverse events related to sedation by non-anesthesiologists are rare. It is simply rare that such events result in litigation. A medical malpractice case requires all four of the following: that a professional duty was owed to the patient, the clinician deviated from the standard of care, injury resulted, and the damages were directly caused by the breach of duty.25 If one or more of these components cannot be established, then a viable malpractice case does not exist.26 For this reason, any legal database is far from inclusive of all complications, but this study nonetheless offers valuable insight. It identifies cases that were substantial enough to be tried (or, for some, settled out of court) and highlights root causes of patient injury under sedation, of which all clinicians administering such should be cognizant.
Variation, expectations, consent, litigation and GIRFT…
Published in British Journal of Neurosurgery, 2022
Three distinct studies identified the following three primary motivations for filing medical malpractice claims: 1) holding the physician or health system accountable, 2) seeking an explanation for the adverse outcome, and 3) financial reward.2 While poor outcomes and financial incentives are certainly motivations in litigation, the physician-patient relationship is the primary motivation. A good relationship can protect against claims while a poor relationship is a significant risk factor, independent of outcomes. An overwhelming majority of patients cite trust as the most important predictor for patient satisfaction, even greater than perceived clinical competence of the practitioner. A successful physician-patient relationship lies in communication. Distrust within the relationship is associated with poor outcomes. By ensuring strong communication, the patient and the neurosurgeon may confidently participate as partners in informed decision-making, perhaps even learning together in the process. With the neurosurgeon as a partner in the decision-making process, the patient will not view their provider as an adversary in the event of a poor outcome, thus hopefully reducing the risk of litigation.