Use of the Physician Insurers Association of America Database as a Surveillance Tool for Diabetes-Related Malpractice Claims in the U.S.

Meredith, Valerie; Cook, Curtiss B.; Penman, Alan D.

doi:10.2337/diacare.21.7.1096

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with this analysis are reports that the number of malpractice claims relating to diabetes is declining, 35 despite a increasing prevalence of the disease and the multitude of complications that can result from mismanagement. One recent study found that, of 10 conditions that led to malpractice claims for negligent care in primary care, 8 were acute conditions, and diabetes ranked ninth (next to last) in frequency.…”

Section: Particular Risk Factorssupporting

confidence: 67%

Liability Implications of Physician-Directed Care Coordination

Hall

Peeples²,

Lord³

2005

The Annals of Family Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE Various public and private initiatives encourage physicians to coordinate care for patients who have multiple chronic conditions, but physicians may resist doing so for fear of liability. This article assesses the extent of liability risk. METHODSThis qualitative study combines legal research with key informant interviews. Relevant legal authorities were identifi ed through literature searches in legal databases. In-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 16 key informants who have relevant expertise in malpractice insurance, risk management, or liability law. Additionally, 19 other participants with relevant experience in case management or managed care were briefl y queried about their liability experience relating to care management.RESULTS Some aspects of care coordination for patients with multiple chronic conditions hold potential for higher liability. Physicians coordinating care have a broader responsibility for patients with complex conditions who have a greater chance of poor outcomes. Care coordinators may be held to a higher standard of care by adopting best practices guidelines or by making medical decisions on issues that require specialized expertise. Other aspects, however, lower liability risk: elderly patients are less likely to sue, care coordination should improve outcomes, and the information systems that support enhanced care coordination target the major sources of medical error in primary care. On balance, the liability risks of care coordination are commensurate with other risks in primary care practice. Liability insurers indicated no reluctance to insure physicians who coordinate care for patients with multiple chronic conditions and no strong tendency to attribute higher risk to this role. Physicians who currently perform these or similar functions have not encountered demonstrably higher liability.CONCLUSIONS Physicians' perceptions about the liability risks of coordinating care for patients with multiple chronic conditions do not match evidence about the factors actually driving liability. It appears from many informed sources that there is no strong basis for physicians who perform these functions to have serious concerns about liability; instead, care coordination done well may lower liability risks. INTRODUCTIONV arious public, private, and professional initiatives have focused on improving care for persons with chronic conditions seek to improve how physicians coordinate care among multiple specialties and across modes of treatment. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] For instance, the Future of Family Medicine report calls for a New Model of care that provides "a personal medical home" for each patient "that serves as the focal point through which" care is coordinated across multiple specialties and medical disciplines. This approach is consistent with a core aim of primary care to manage all aspects of a patient's care on an on-going basis, including care provided through specialty referrals, rather than focusing only on resolving the patient's immediate ...

show abstract

Section: Particular Risk Factorssupporting

confidence: 67%

Liability Implications of Physician-Directed Care Coordination

Hall

Peeples²,

Lord³

2005

The Annals of Family Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 Five other studies reported proportions which ranged from 7.6% to 16% of total claims. [27][28][29][30][31] In the UK, GPs represented the greatest proportion of an overall 20% increase in claims from 2009 to 2010 and claims involving GPs more than doubled in the period 1994-1999. 32 33 In Australia, GPs had the highest proportion of malpractice claims and the highest number of new claims on the national Medical Indemnity National Collection database for the years 2009 and 2010.…”

Section: Epidemiology Of Malpractice Claims In Primary Care Prevalencmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…17 Diabetes-related indemnity payments for family practitioners ranked second overall in terms of total diabetes indemnity paid totalling $8 316 610.00 for the period 1985-1996. 28 In Australia, awards of greater than $250 000 were awarded to 15% of total paid claims. 34 A UK report published in 2011 indicated that compensation awards for GP malpractice claims were rising and that 13 claims were awarded compensation in excess of £1 million.…”

Section: Malpractice Claims Outcomes and Compensation Awardedmentioning

confidence: 99%

The epidemiology of malpractice claims in primary care: a systematic review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to examine the epidemiology of malpractice claims in primary care.DesignA computerised systematic literature search was conducted. Studies were included if they reported original data (≥10 cases) pertinent to malpractice claims, were based in primary care and were published in the English language. Data were synthesised using a narrative approach.SettingPrimary care.ParticipantsMalpractice claimants.Primary outcomeMalpractice claim (defined as a written demand for compensation for medical injury). We recorded: medical misadventure cited in claims, missed/delayed diagnoses cited in claims, outcome of claims, prevalence of claims and compensation awarded to claimants.ResultsOf the 7152 articles retrieved by electronic search, a total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the narrative analysis. Twenty-eight studies presented data from medical indemnity malpractice claims databases and six studies presented survey data. Fifteen studies were based in the USA, nine in the UK, seven in Australia, one in Canada and two in France. The commonest medical misadventure resulting in claims was failure to or delay in diagnosis, which represented 26–63% of all claims across included studies. Common missed or delayed diagnoses included cancer and myocardial infarction in adults and meningitis in children. Medication error represented the second commonest domain representing 5.6–20% of all claims across included studies. The prevalence of malpractice claims in primary care varied across countries. In the USA and Australia when compared with other clinical disciplines, general practice ranked in the top five specialties accounting for the most claims, representing 7.6–20% of all claims. However, the majority of claims were successfully defended.ConclusionsThis review of malpractice claims in primary care highlights diagnosis and medication error as areas to be prioritised in developing educational strategies and risk management systems.

show abstract

“…As American literature reveals, glaucoma care, cataract surgery, radial keratotomy for myopia reduction, LASIK surgery, failure to diagnose binocular vision anomalies in children or adults in whom this problem may result from a brain tumour in time, siderosis‐related retinal detachment secondary to a penetrating iron foreign body and diabetes mellitus‐related problems are the most common causes of malpractice claims (Scholles 1986; Classe 1995; Classe & Rutstein 1995; Ellis et al 1997; Meredith et al 1998; Van Buskirk 1998; Brick 1999).…”

Section: Medical Liability In Ophthalmology Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Physicians' liability in ophthalmology practice

Mavroforou

Michalodimitrakis

2003

Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.Purpose: The aims of this paper are to point out the importance of coherence in established guidelines in daily practice, highlight the value of signed patient informed consent forms and stress the value of a good understanding of the law, while focusing on issues related to malpractice in ophthalmology. Methods: Search of the current relevant literature. Results: The most common causes of medical litigation in ophthalmology are related to LASIK surgery, cataract surgery, glaucoma care, radial keratotomy for myopia reduction and failure to diagnose binocular vision anomalies in children and adults in a timely fashion. The litigation raised in most cases is driven by unfavourable outcomes and not by malpractice. Conclusion: Maintenance of high standards in daily practice, with continuous training and clear communication along with the appropriate documentation of any procedure carried out, may improve the professional safety of practising eye specialists in the event of medical litigation. Although the use of patient informed consent varies substantially among European countries, it may serve as useful evidence in the physician's defence.

show abstract

Use of the Physician Insurers Association of America Database as a Surveillance Tool for Diabetes-Related Malpractice Claims in the U.S.

Cited by 7 publications

References 26 publications

Liability Implications of Physician-Directed Care Coordination

Liability Implications of Physician-Directed Care Coordination

The epidemiology of malpractice claims in primary care: a systematic review

Physicians' liability in ophthalmology practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About