The US medical liability system: Evidence for legislative reform

24Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite state and federal efforts to implement medical malpractice reform, there is limited evidence on which to base policy decisions. The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) offers an opportunity to evaluate the effects of previous malpractice tort reforms on malpractice payments and premiums. METHODS: For every state and the District of Columbia, we calculated the number of malpractice payments, total amount paid, and average payment from NPDB data reported from 1999 through 2001. We analyzed 44,913 claims using logistic regression to study associations between payments, physician premiums, and 10 state statutory tort reforms. RESULTS: Wide variations exist in malpractice payments among states. The reforms most associated with lower payments and premiums were total and noneconomic damage caps. Mean payments were 26% lower in states with total damage caps ($196,495.34 vs $265,554.50, P = .001). Mean payments were 22% less in states with noneconomic damage caps ($219,225.98 vs $279,849.86, P = .010). Total damage caps were associated with lower mean annual premiums, especially for obstetricians ($22,371.57 vs $42,728.68, P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Guirguis-Blake, J., Fryer, G. E., Phillips, R. L., Szabat, R., & Green, L. A. (2006). The US medical liability system: Evidence for legislative reform. Annals of Family Medicine, 4(3), 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.535

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free