Effects Of A Communication-And-Resolution Program On Hospitals’ Malpractice Claims And Costs

Anesthesia-Related Closed Claims in Free-Standing Ambulatory Surgery Centers

BACKGROUND

As higher acuity procedures continue to move from hospital-based operating rooms (HORs) to free-standing ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), concerns for patient safety remain high. We conducted a contemporary, descriptive analysis of anesthesia-related liability closed claims to understand risks to patient safety in the free-standing ASC setting, compared to HORs.

METHODS

Free-standing ASC and HOR closed claims between 2015 and 2022 from The Doctors Company that involved an anesthesia provider responsible for the claim were included. We compared the coded data of 212 free-standing ASC claims with 268 HOR claims in terms of severity of injury, major injuries, allegations, comorbidities, contributing factors, and financial value of the claim.

RESULTS

Free-standing ASC claims accounted for almost half of all anesthesia-related cases (44%, 212 of 480). Claims with high severity of injury were less frequent in free-standing ASCs (22%) compared to HORs (34%; P = .004). The most common types of injuries in both free-standing ASCs and HORs were dental injury (17% vs 17%) and nerve damage (14% vs 11%). No difference in frequency was noted for types of injuries between claims from free-standing ASCs versus HORs--except that burns appeared more frequently in free-standing ASC claims than in HORs (6% vs 2%; P = .015). Claims with alleged improper management of anesthesia occurred less frequently among free-standing ASC claims than HOR claims (17% vs 29%; P = .01), as well as positioning-related injury (3% vs 8%; P = .025). No difference was seen in frequency of claims regarding alleged improper performance of anesthesia procedures between free-standing ASCs and HORs (25% vs 19%; P = .072). Technical performance of procedures (ie, intubation and nerve block) was the most common contributing factor among free-standing ASC (74%) and HOR (74%) claims. Free-standing ASC claims also had a higher frequency of communication issues between provider and patient/family versus HOR claims (20% vs 10%; P = .004). Most claims were not associated with major comorbidities; however, cardiovascular disease was less prevalent in free-standing ASC claims versus HOR claims (3% vs 11%; P = .002). The mean ± standard deviation total of expenses and payments was lower among free-standing ASC claims ($167,000 ± $295,000) than HOR claims ($332,000 ± $775,000; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of medical malpractice claims may indicate higher-than-expected patient and procedural complexity in free-standing ASCs, presenting patient safety concerns and opportunities for improvement. Ambulatory anesthesia practices should consider improving safety culture and communication with families while ensuring that providers have up-to-date training and resources to safely perform routine anesthesia procedures.

Patient characteristics of, and remedial interventions for, complaints and medico-legal claims against doctors: a rapid review of the literature

BACKGROUND

It is uncertain if patient's characteristics are associated with complaints and claims against doctors. Additionally, evidence for the effectiveness of remedial interventions on rates of complaints and claims against doctors has not been synthesised.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid review of recent literature to answer: Question 1 "What are the common characteristics and circumstances of patients who are most likely to complain or bring a claim about the care they have received from a doctor?" and Question 2 "What initiatives or interventions have been shown to be effective at reducing complaints and claims about the care patients have received from a doctor?". We used a systematic search (most recently in July 2023) of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature. Studies were screened against inclusion criteria and critically appraised in duplicate using standard tools. Results were summarised using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

From 8079 search results, we reviewed the full text of 250 studies. We included 25 studies: seven for Question 1 (6 comparative studies with controls and one systematic review) and 18 studies for Question 2 (14 uncontrolled pre-post studies, 2 comparative studies with controls and 2 systematic reviews). Most studies were set in hospitals across a mix of medical specialties. Other than for patients with mental health conditions (two studies), no other patient characteristics demonstrated either a strong or consistent effect on the rate of complaints or claims against their treating doctors. Risk management programs (6 studies), and communication and resolution programs (5 studies) were the most studied of 6 intervention types. Evidence for reducing complaints and medico-legal claims, costs or premiums and more timely management was apparent for both types of programs. Only 1 to 3 studies were included for peer programs, medical remediation, shared decision-making, simulation training and continuing professional development, with few generalisable results.

CONCLUSION

Few patient characteristics can be reliably related to the likelihood of medico-legal complaints or claims. There is some evidence that interventions can reduce the number and costs of claims, the number of complaints, and the timeliness of claims. However, across both questions, the strength of the evidence is very weak and is based on only a few studies or study designs that are highly prone to bias.

Disclosure following a medical error: lessons learned from a national initiative of workshops with patients, healthcare teams, and executives

BACKGROUND

Despite the increase in disclosures of medical errors, transparency remains a challenge. Recognized barriers include shame, fear of litigation, disciplinary actions, and loss of patient trust. In 2018, the Israeli Ministry of Health initiated a series of workshops about disclosure of medical errors. The workshops involved medical center executives, healthcare providers, patients, and family members of patients who had previously been harmed by a medical error. This study presents the lessons learned about perceived challenges in disclosure of errors in 15 such workshops.

METHODS

Data collection included participant observations in 15 workshops, full audio recordings of all of the workshops, and documentation of detailed field notes. Analysis was performed under thematic analysis guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified four main themes: "Providers agree on the value of disclosure of a medical error to the patient"; "Emotional challenges of disclosure of medical error to patients"; "The medico-legal discourse challenges transparency"; and "Providers and patients call for a change in the culture regarding disclosure of medical errors". Participant observations indicated that the presence of a patient who had experienced a tragedy in another hospital, and who was willing to share it created an intimate atmosphere that enabled an open conversation between parties.

CONCLUSION

The study shows the moral, human, and educational values of open discourse in a protective setting after the occurrence of a medical error. We believe that workshops like these may help foster a culture of institutional disclosure following medical errors. We recommend that the Ministry of Health extend such workshops to all healthcare facilities, establish guidelines and mandate training for skills in disclosure for all providers.

Analysis of Closed Claims Among All Medical Specialties: Importance of Communication and Other Non-Clinical Contributing Factors

Objective

Medical malpractice claims represent patient dissatisfaction of care delivered by their healthcare provider. Evaluation of contributing factors (CFs) associated with claims provides important information to optimize the patient-provider relationship.

Study Design

A total of 21,101 closed claims with 54,479 CFs (2.2 contributing factors per claim) from a large medical professional liability coverage provider were analyzed from 2010 to 2019.

Results

Four clinical CFs (technical performance, management of therapy, patient assessment, and patient factors) and four nonclinical CFs (communication between providers and patient, communication among providers, failure or delay in obtaining a consult, and insufficient documentation) were identified >1,500 times. Nonclinical CFs increased as a percentage from 50% in the first part of the study period to 54% in the second part of the study period (p < 0.01), and were more frequent in cases associated with indemnity when compared to clinical CFs (Nonclinical: 57% vs 43%; p < 0.001). Poor communication as a CF increased steadily during the study period (3-year average; 2010-2012: 777 CF/year vs 2017-2019: 1207 CF/year; p < 0.001). In claims associated with high severity injury, poor communication among providers was more significant than poor communication between the provider and patient (63% vs 29%; p < 0.001), mainly due to failure to convey the severity of the patient's condition. For non-surgical specialties except psychiatry, communication was the highest CF and the second or third CF for psychiatry or surgical specialties.

Discussion

Clinical and nonclinical CFs are equally important for malpractice claims. Communications issues are particularly important regardless of specialty. While focusing on clinical quality is important, implementing strategies that account for nonclinical issues, with a particular focus on communication, would have significant benefits particularly in an environment of increased consolidation of healthcare delivery systems.

Prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine among physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Defensive medicine, characterized by physicians' inclination toward excessive diagnostic tests and procedures, has emerged as a significant concern in modern healthcare due to its high prevalence and detrimental effects. Despite the growing concerns among healthcare providers, policymakers, and physicians, comprehensive synthesis of the literature on the prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine among physicians has yet been reported. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2022, utilizing six databases (i.e. Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library). A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of defensive medicine. Of the 8892 identified articles, 64 eligible studies involving 35.9 thousand physicians across 23 countries were included. The overall pooled prevalence of defense medications was 75.8%. Physicians engaged in both assurance and avoidance behaviors, with the most prevalent subitems being increasing follow-up and avoidance of high-complication treatment protocols. The prevalence of defensive medicine was higher in the African region [88.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 80.4%-95.8%] and lower-middle-income countries (89.0%; 95% CI: 78.2%-99.8%). Among the medical specialties, anesthesiologists (92.2%; 95% CI: 89.2%-95.3%) exhibited the highest prevalence. Further, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the nine factors at the individual, relational, and organizational levels were calculated, and the influence of previous experience in medical-legal litigation (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.13-2.18) should be considered. The results of this study indicate a high global prevalence of defensive medicine among physicians, underscoring the necessity of implementing targeted interventions to reduce its use, especially in certain regions and specialties. Policymakers should implement measures to improve physicians' medical skills, enhance physician-patient communication, address physicians' medical-legal litigation fears, and reform the medical liability system. Future research should focus on devising and assessing interventions to reduce the use of defensive medicine and to improve the quality of patient care.

Virtual reality evidence on the impact of physicians' open versus defensive communication on patients

Using virtual reality (VR) in an experimental setting, we analyse how communicating more openly about a medical incident influences patients' feelings and behavioural intentions. Using VR headsets, participants were immersed in an actual hospital room where they were told by a physician that a medical incident had occurred. In a given scenario, half of the participants were confronted by a physician who communicated openly about the medical incident, while the other half were confronted with the exact same scenario except that the physician employed a very defensive communication strategy. The employed technology allowed us to keep everything else in the environment constant. Participants exposed to open disclosure were significantly more likely to take further steps (such as contacting a lawyer to discuss options and filing a complaint against the hospital) and express more feelings of blame against the physician. At the same time, these participants rated the physician's communication skills and general impression more highly than those who were confronted with a defensive physician. Nevertheless, communicating openly about the medical incident does not affect trust in the physician and his competence, perceived incident severity and likelihood of changing physician and filing suit.

Medical Dispute Committees in the Netherlands: a qualitative study of patient expectations and experiences

BACKGROUND

Health care incidents, such as medical errors, cause tragedies all over the world. Recent legislation in the Netherlands has established medical dispute committees to provide for an appeals procedure offering an alternative to civil litigation and to meet the needs of clients. Dispute committees incorporate a hybrid procedure where one can file a complaint and a claim for damages resulting in a verdict without going to court. The procedure is at the crossroads of complaints law and civil litigation. This study seeks to analyze to what extent patients and family members' expectations and experiences with dispute committees match the goals of the new legislation.

METHODS

This qualitative, retrospective research includes in-depth, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with patients or family members who filed a complaint with a dispute committee in the Netherlands. The researchers conducted an inductive, thematic analysis of the qualitative data.

RESULTS

A total of 26 interviews were held with 30 patients and family members. The results showed that participants particularly felt the need to be heard and to make a positive impact on health care. Some wished to be financially compensated, for others money was the last thing on their mind. The results demonstrated the existence of unequal power relationships between participants and both the defendant and dispute committee members. Participants reported the added value of (legal) support and expressed the need for dialogue at the hearing. Participants sometimes experienced closure after the proceedings, but often did not feel heard or felt a lack of a practical outcome and a tangible improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that participants' expectations and experiences were not always met by the current set up of the dispute committee proceedings. Participants did not feel heard, while they did value the potential for monetary compensation. In addition, some participants did not experience an empowered position but rather a feeling of a power misbalance. The feeling of a power misbalance and not being heard might be explained by existing epistemic injustice, which is a concept that should be carefully considered in processes after health care incidents.

Patients at the centre after a health care incident: A scoping review of hospital strategies targeting communication and nonmaterial restoration

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to provide an overview of the strategies adopted by hospitals that target effective communication and nonmaterial restoration (i.e., without a financial or material focus) after health care incidents, and to formulate elements in hospital strategies that patients consider essential by analysing how patients have evaluated these strategies.

BACKGROUND

In the aftermath of a health care incident, hospitals are tasked with responding to the patients' material and nonmaterial needs, mainly restoration and communication. Currently, an overview of these strategies is lacking. In particular, a gap exists concerning how patients evaluate these strategies.

SEARCH STRATEGY AND INCLUSION CRITERIA

To identify studies in this scoping review, and following the methodological framework set out by Arksey and O'Malley, seven subject-relevant electronic databases were used (PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO and Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection). Reference lists of included studies were also checked for relevant studies. Studies were included if published in English, after 2000 and as peer-reviewed articles.

MAIN RESULTS AND SYNTHESIS

The search yielded 13,989 hits. The review has a final inclusion of 16 studies. The inclusion led to an analysis of five different hospital strategies: open disclosure processes, communication-and-resolution programmes, complaints procedures, patients-as-partners in learning from health care incidents and subsequent disclosure, and mediation. The analysis showed three main domains that patients considered essential: interpersonal communication, organisation around disclosure and support and desired outcomes.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

This scoping review specifically takes the patient perspective in its methodological design and analysis. Studies were included if they contained an evaluation by patients, and the included studies were analysed on the essential elements for patients.

The Impacts of Disclosure and a Proactive Compensation Offer on Chinese Patients' Actions After Medical Errors

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to obtain evidence of the impacts of error disclosure and the impacts of a proactive compensation offer on Chinese patients' actions after medical errors.

METHODS

A total of 915 responses were collected from a questionnaire survey. Two fictitious cases (entailed moderate and severe harm) that involved error disclosure were described. One of 5 disclosure and compensation types was randomly provided to each participant. The 5 types were combinations of 3 disclosure types (no disclosure, partial disclosure, and full disclosure) and 2 proactive compensation offer categories (no offer and an offer), with the exception of no disclosure but a proactive compensation offer. The respondents were asked about their willingness to take actions if they were the affected patient.

RESULTS

The generalized ordinal logit regression model showed that error disclosure did not increase the likelihood of the patients taking action, such as changing physicians, complaining, or filing lawsuits. A proactive compensation offer decreased the patients' willingness to file lawsuits but had no significant influence on the other action choices. In addition, the patients' actions were affected by other factors, such as the severity of the error, age, sex, education level, being religious, prior error experience, and health insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that "disclosure and compensation" programs are developed in China. To ensure their implementation, it is recommended that appropriate training is provided and that the disclosure culture in health care organizations is improved. Furthermore, laws or regulations are required that govern error disclosure and provide support for health care professionals and organizations.

Medico-legal considerations in the context of neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia

Neonatal encephalopathy (NE) is a significant complication of the peripartum period. It can lead to lifelong neurologic disabilities, including cerebral palsy, cognitive impairments, developmental delays, and epilepsy. Induced hypothermia is the first therapy, which has shown promise in improving the outcomes for neonates with moderate to severe NE following a presumed intrapartum insult. NE is also a frequent source of medical malpractice litigation. In this paper, we will review salient features of the American Tort System as it pertains to medical malpractice. We will discuss the obstetric medico-legal implications of therapeutic hypothermia and suggest a five-step approach to analyzing neonatal cases for causation, etiology, timing of occurrence, responsibility, and liability. We will close with three illustrative clinical cases.

A Retrospective Analysis of Malpractice-Related Procedure Rates for Internal Medicine Specialists at an Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND

Although malpractice litigation is common in the United States, the risk of a malpractice claim for procedures performed by internal medical practitioners is unknown. This study determined the frequency of malpractice claims related to procedures in a large department of medicine at an academic medical center over a five-year period.

METHODS

Researchers retrospectively reviewed all malpractice claims and procedures performed by internal medicine practitioners of all specialties between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2019, in a department of medicine at a large academic medical center. A list of all procedures and Current Procedural Terminology codes performed by internal medicine practitioners was compiled. Active procedure-related malpractice claims and the total number of procedures performed during the study period were counted.

RESULTS

During the study period, 353,661 procedures were performed by internal medicine practitioners. During the same period, 76 active malpractice claims were identified, of which only 13 (17.1%) were procedure-related. For 2 different malpractice claims, a single patient had 2 procedures; thus 13 total claims related to the performance of 15 procedures. The proportion of procedure-related claims per total number of procedures performed was 0.37 claims/10,000 cases. The frequency of procedure-related malpractice claims per number of procedures performed ranged from 1 in 38 for pulmonary artery thrombolytic therapy to 1 in 137,325 for colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Procedure-related malpractice claims against internal medicine practitioners at a large academic medical center over a five-year period were infrequent despite significant procedural volume. Contextualizing procedure-related malpractice claims in terms of procedure-specific volume reframes the reporting of malpractice risk.

Putting the Patient in Patient Safety Investigations: Barriers and Strategies for Involvement

OBJECTIVES

In an adverse event investigation, the patients have the potential to add a unique perspective because they can identify contributing factors that providers may miss. However, patients are rarely included in patient safety investigations. We aimed to identify the barriers to patient involvement in patient safety investigations and propose strategies to overcome them.

METHODS

We reviewed literature on active participation by patients in safety investigations to construct a framework for healthcare institutions to use in approaching patients about a potential role in investigating an error in their care. We searched 3 electronic databases (PubMed, PSNet, Web of Science) for the years 1990 to 2018, without restrictions to language. Search terms included: "patient empowerment, "patient involvement," "patient participation," "patient safety investigation," "root cause analysis," "error analysis." We also examined reference lists of relevant studies to identify additional articles.

RESULTS

Our electronic search produced 10,624 records with 30 potentially eligible articles. However, we identified only 6 relevant published articles. We used these as the basis for a proposed framework that is predicated on the thoughtful disclosure of adverse events and has 3 main levels (i.e., patient, clinician, and institutional level). For each level, we identify barriers to patient participation and potential strategies to overcome them.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed framework can be used as a starting point to promote patient involvement in error investigations. Involving patients in patient safety investigations could increase patient centeredness, patient autonomy, and transparency and make analyses more effective by adding unique and potentially actionable information.

"If your feelings were hurt, I'm sorry…": How Third-Year Medical Students Observe, Learn From, and Engage in Apologies

BACKGROUND

Apologies may play a significant role in medical care, especially in the context of patient safety, medical error disclosure, and malpractice. Studies have shown that when state laws, institutional policies, and individual skills align-including the ability to offer a sincere apology-patients and families benefit. However, little is known about how, and under what conditions, physicians offer apologies in day-to-day care. Even less is known about what medical students learn about apologies from observing their superiors in these settings.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize third-year medical students' experiences of observing and engaging in apologies.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive analysis of student professionalism narratives.

PARTICIPANTS

Third-year medical students at Indiana University School of Medicine.

APPROACH

A search of 7,384 unique narratives yielded 238 with apologies. A rubric based on four key elements of genuine apologies ((1) acknowledgement, (2) explanation, (3) regret/remorse, and (4) reparation) was used to classify the kind of apology offered. Apology completeness, impact, and timing were also coded.

KEY RESULTS

Seventeen percent of all apologies were complete (i.e., contained all four elements). Over 40% were coded as incomplete or "non-apology" apologies (i.e., those with only the first two elements). A significant relationship between apology completeness and positive student experience was found. Most apologies were offered by the attending physician or resident to patients and family members. Students were generally positive about their experiences, but one in five were coded as negative. Some students were distressed enough to offer apologies on behalf of the faculty. Apology timing did not make a significant difference in terms of student experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Few education programs target apologies in the context of routine practice. With little formal instruction, students may rely on adopting what their seniors do. Faculty have an important role to play in modeling the apology process when harms-both great and small-occur.

Assessing Patients' Experiences with Medical Injury Reconciliation Processes: Item Generation for a Novel Survey Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Many health care organizations want to improve their responses to patients who suffer medical injuries. Their ability to understand how well they meet patients' needs is limited by the lack of suitable instruments for assessing injured patients' experiences.

METHODS

This study aimed to generate items for a patient experience questionnaire that medical facilities can use to assess how well resolution met patients' needs. The Medical Injury Reconciliation Experiences Survey (MIRES) was based on findings from previous studies of New Zealand and American patients' experiences of non-litigation resolution of medical injuries. The researchers performed a content analysis of 24 transcripts from a stratified random sample of 92 interviews from the prior studies. Themes were extracted to develop a draft questionnaire, which was revised following feedback from experts. Cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with 24 New Zealand and American injured patients.

RESULTS

There were 40 items in the following domains: perceptions of communications with health care providers after the injury (15 items), perceptions of remedial gestures (11 items), indicia of the patient's overall satisfaction with the reconciliation process (4 items), the nature and impacts of the injury (5 items), and patients' characteristics (5 items). Participants' feedback about the questionnaire was predominantly positive. Their suggestions led to 37 revisions.

CONCLUSION

The MIRES was comprehensible and acceptable to this group of post-injury patients. While further testing is desirable, the MIRES offers promise as a practicable approach that health care organizations can use to assess how well their reconciliation processes met patients' needs.

Ensuring successful implementation of communication-and-resolution programmes

Background

Communication-and-resolution programmes (CRP) aim to increase transparency surrounding adverse events, improve patient safety and promote reconciliation by proactively meeting injured patients’ needs. Although early adopters of CRP models reported relatively smooth implementation, other organisations have struggled to achieve the same. However, two Massachusetts hospital systems implementing a CRP demonstrated high fidelity to protocol without raising liability costs.

Study question

What factors may account for the Massachusetts hospitals’ ability to implement their CRP successfully?

Setting

The CRP was collaboratively designed by two academic medical centres, four of their community hospitals and a multistakeholder coalition.

Data and methods

Data were synthesised from (1) key informant interviews around the time of implementation and 2 years later with individuals important to the CRP’s success and (2) notes from 89 teleconferences between hospitals’ CRP implementation teams and study staff to discuss implementation progress. Interview transcripts and teleconference notes were analysed using standard methods of thematic content analysis. A total of 45 individuals participated in interviews (n=24 persons in 38 interviews), teleconferences (n=32) or both (n=11).

Results

Participants identified facilitators of the hospitals’ success as: (1) the support of top institutional leaders, (2) heavy investments in educating physicians about the programme, (3) active cultivation of the relationship between hospital risk managers and representatives from the liability insurer, (4) the use of formal decision protocols, (5) effective oversight by full-time project managers, (6) collaborative group implementation, and (7) small institutional size.

Conclusion

Although not necessarily causal, several distinctive factors appear to be associated with successful CRP implementation.

The most common patient safety issues resulting in legal action against neonatologists

Common patient safety issues may result in injuries to babies in the newborn period. A medical malpractice lawsuit is one way in which an injured patient can obtain compensation for the injuries they sustained as the result of an error. There are a number of common areas of malpractice risk for neonatologists including the delivery room, jaundice, hypoglycemia, and late preterm infants. A better understanding of the medical malpractice system and common patient safety issues in neonatology can lead to protective strategies to reduce risk for untoward events and subsequent litigation. Strategies including maintaining competency, following national guidelines, and proper communication and documentation can improve the care and treatment of neonatal patients and their families resulting in less malpractice exposure.

A Guide to Investigating Suspected Outbreaks of Mucormycosis in Healthcare

This report serves as a guide for investigating mucormycosis infections in healthcare. We describe lessons learned from previous outbreaks and offer methods and tools that can aid in these investigations. We also offer suggestions for conducting environmental assessments, implementing infection control measures, and initiating surveillance to ensure that interventions were effective. While not all investigations of mucormycosis infections will identify a single source, all can potentially lead to improvements in infection control.

Medical Malpractice Involving Pulmonary/Critical Care Physicians

BACKGROUND

Medical malpractice data can be leveraged to understand specialty-specific risk.

METHODS

Malpractice claims were examined from the Comparative Benchmarking System (2007-2016), a national database containing > 30% of claims data in the United States. Claims were identified with either internal medicine or pulmonary/critical care (PCC) physicians as the primary provider involved in the harm. Claim characteristics were compared according to specialty and care setting (inpatient vs outpatient), and multiple regression analysis was performed to predict claim payment.

RESULTS

Claims involving PCC physicians differed from those involving internal medicine physicians in terms of harm severity, allegation, final diagnosis, procedure involvement, payment rate, and contributing factors. The majority of claims involving PCC physicians resulted from inpatient care (63%), of which only 26% occurred delivering intensive care. Eighty-one percent were from harm events that resulted in death/permanent injury. The most common diagnosis was laceration during a procedure for inpatient claims (6%) and lung cancer for outpatient claims (28%). Thirty-one percent of claims overall involved procedures. Although only 26% were paid, the median indemnity per paid claim of $285,769 ranked PCC as the twelfth highest of 69 specialties. The two variables associated with indemnity payment were outpatient care (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.01-2.86) and temporary harm (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Malpractice claims involving PCC physicians were distinct from claims involving internal medicine physicians. Although only one-quarter of claims was paid, the indemnity per claim was high among specialties. Specialty-specific prevention strategies must be developed to mitigate both patient harm and provider malpractice risk.