Expert witnesses: neuroradiologists' perspectives

Prescribing Justice: A Close Examination of Physicians Acting As Expert Witnesses in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION

An expert witness is a person who provides testimony on issues that the court finds to be outside the scope of their expertise and experience. Any physician who has performed an independent medical evaluation or written medical records can and should expect to be requested as an expert witness. Medical malpractice, workers' compensation, and personal injury are the most prominent areas where medical expert witnesses participate and provide opinions and testimony. To our knowledge, this is the first study to be conducted in Saudi Arabia on physicians acting as expert witnesses.

METHODS

This observational descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in Saudi Arabia from November 2022 to July 2023 aimed to assess physicians' experiences, education, training, willingness, self-competency, attitude, and perception as expert witnesses. The study population consisted of physicians working in Saudi Arabia, with at least a specialist level of professional expertise. Participants completed a self-administered online survey, utilizing a researcher-designed questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 417 participants, with males comprising 51.3% of the sample, responded to the survey. More than half of the physicians (58.3%) had never produced a medical report for the court. Among those who had, the majority had done so one to twice. Similarly, the majority had never testified in court (77.5%), with only a small percentage having done so once or twice. Approximately 80% of participants had no prior education or training as expert witnesses, but among those who did, courses and workshops were the most common forms of education or training. Most participants expressed interest in learning or training for this role (69.1%) and were willing to provide medical reports or court testimony (73.9%). However, half of the participants did not feel competent in writing a medical report for the court, and more than half lacked confidence in giving testimony.

CONCLUSION

The findings highlight the need for increased engagement, education, and training among physicians, particularly early and mid-career professionals, to enhance their confidence and competence as expert witnesses and ensure ethical practices in the medicolegal domain in Saudi Arabia.

Characteristics of Radiologists Serving as Medical Malpractice Expert Witnesses for Defense Versus Plaintiff

PURPOSE

Previous studies have reported higher qualification characteristics for anesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and otolaryngologists serving as defense (versus plaintiff) medical malpractice expert witnesses. We assessed such characteristics for radiologist expert witnesses.

METHODS

Using the Westlaw legal research database, we identified radiologists serving as experts in all indexed medical malpractice cases between 2010 and 2019. Online databases were used to identify years of practice experience and scholarly bibliometrics. Using Medicare claims, individual radiologist practice types and mixes were ascertained. Radiologists testifying at least once each for defense and plaintiff were excluded from our defense-only versus plaintiff-only comparative analysis.

RESULTS

Initial Boolean searches yielded 1,042 potential cases; subsequent manual review identified 179 radiologists testifying in 231 lawsuits: 143 testified in one case (58 defense, 85 plaintiff) and 36 testified in multiple cases (10 defense-only, 14 plaintiff-only, 12 both). The 68 defense-only experts had fewer years of practice experience than the 99 plaintiff-only experts (28.3 versus 31.8 years, P = .02), but the two groups were otherwise similar in both practice type (44.6% versus 54.9% academic, P = .62) and mix (63.8% versus 65.8% practiced as subspecialists, P = .37) and as well as numbers of publications (60.5 versus 62.8, P = .86), citations (1,994.1 versus 2,309.2, P = .56), and h-indices (17.2 versus 16.8, P = .89).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to other specialists, radiologists serving as medical malpractice expert witnesses for defense and plaintiff display similar qualifications across various characteristics. Published practice parameter guidelines and experts' ability to blindly review archived original images might together explain this interspecialty discordance.

Perspectives on Neuroradiology Medical Expert Testimony: Fact and Fiction

There are numerous misconceptions about serving as a medical malpractice expert witness. By maintaining an objective perspective based in the unbiased interpretation of the images provided (for both sides of the conflict), one can best serve society as a whole. Most cases for which a neuroradiology expert is recruited are the following: 1) not with the radiologist as a defendant, 2) resolved without court testimony, and 3) short-lived if frivolous. One can learn much about medicine, our nonradiology colleagues, and the litigation process by participating as an expert witness.

The spectrum of expert reports on clinical biochemical toxicology and medicine from an Irish practice

The compounds which generated an expert opinion report in the area of medical toxicology in the period 1999 to 2015 are presented from the toxicological case files of a specialist in chemical pathology and general internal medicine. There were 132 different compounds from 86 cases. Alcohol was involved in 43%, drugs of abuse in 18.6%, volatile carbon compounds in 17.4%, metals in 9.3%, and carbon monoxide in 4.6%. Many compounds appeared once. The duty of the medical expert witness to provide an objective report for the court irrespective of the payer is stated. The addition of references from peer reviewed literature to substantiate the pros and cons of each case is recommended as a standard operating procedure in completing each report.