Medical malpractice in perspective. I--The American experience

Defensive practice among psychiatrists: a questionnaire survey

OBJECTIVE

There has been little research on the prevalence of defensive practice within hospital settings. The aim of this report was to examine the extent of defensiveness among psychiatrists and to examine the relationship between defensiveness and seniority, as well as the effect of previous experiences on the level of defensiveness.

DESIGN

A postal questionnaire survey on defensive practice.

SETTING

Northern Region of England.

SUBJECTS

154 psychiatrists in the region.

RESULTS

96 responses were received from 48 equivalent consultants, 18 specialist registrars, and 23 equivalent senior house officers. Overall, 75% of those who replied had taken defensive actions within the past month. In particular, 21% had admitted patients overcautiously and 29% had placed patients on higher levels of observations. Junior psychiatrists were particularly prone to practise defensively. Important contributing factors included previous experience of complaints (against colleague or self), critical incidents, and legal claims.

CONCLUSION

Almost three quarters of the psychiatrists who responded had practised defensively within the past month. The higher propensity of junior trainees to practise defensively may be attributable to their lack of confidence and experience. Experience of complaints (colleague or self) and critical incidents were important factors for defensive practice. Better and more structured training might reduce the high level of defensive practice and the way complaints and investigations are handled should be improved to maintain a truly "no blame" environment conducive to learning from past experience.

Expectations of health care: promoted, managed or shared?

Volume, costs and content of medical care depend on professional and public expectations. The UK National Health Service (NHS) removed price barriers to access, so depressed expectations became an important factor in cost control. In USA, professional control of care business inflated expectations and costs. Managed care in the NHS failed to rationalize care because managers seem even less trustworthy than clinicians as arbiters of rational expectations in contexts of underfunding. Rational expectations depend on restored trust, mutual and managerial respect for expertise of both clinicians and patients, and transcendence of the provider-consumer model for value production in medical care.

Change in obstetric practice in response to fear of litigation in the British Isles

The increased number of medical negligence claims against obstetricians and gynaecologists has led to concerns about a trend towards defensive medical practice in the UK. The attitudes of obstetricians in the British Isles to tests of fetal and maternal wellbeing, which may influence decisions about patient care, were investigated in 3194 Fellows and Members of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Perceived accuracy of tests ranged from 86.3% for fetal blood sampling to 25.9% for biochemical tests. Despite some tests being perceived as having poor accuracy, all were widely used even by those who deemed them inaccurate. The most frequent explanations given for this paradoxical finding were that such tests were an aid to clinical judgement and were necessary for medicolegal reasons. Our data indicate that tests deemed to be inaccurate are used in clinical practice because some obstetricians fear litigation. Our findings were not influenced by age, gender, grade of doctor, or site of practice.

Why family doctors should not advertise

Medical care is a form of production of values, but not of commodities. This article argues that advertising as it is normally understood is not appropriate to general practitioner care. Acceptance of advertising by the medical profession would assist in the commercialization of a currently non-commercial relationship between doctors and patients. We should refuse to take this step and accept our responsibility to devise better futures than the market has so far been able to provide.

Medical malpractice claims in obstetrics and gynaecology: comparisons between the United States and Britain

Obstetricians and gynaecologists have been particularly affected by the increase in the cost and number of medical malpractice claims in Britain. US obstetricians and gynaecologists have experienced a disproportionately higher rate of claim than other practitioners in that country. This article reviews the US experience of obstetrics and gynaecology malpractice claims and questions the validity of showing comparisons between the US and UK. However, even if British malpractice claims do not reach the level of American claims, the effects of claims on the National Health Service, recruitment to obstetrics and gynaecology, and clinical practice are significant.