Relation between negligent adverse events and the outcomes of medical-malpractice litigation.
Background We have previously shown that in New York State the initiation of malpractice suits correlates poorly with the actual occurrence of adverse events (injuries resulting from medical treatment) and negligence.
There is little information on the outcome of such lawsuits, however.
To assess the ability of malpractice litigation to make accurate determinations, we studied 51 malpractice suits to identify factors that predict payment to plaintiffs.
Methods Among malpractice claims that we reviewed independently in an earlier study, we identified 51 litigated claims and followed them over a 10-year period to determine whether the malpractice insurer had closed the case.
We obtained detailed summaries of the cases from the insurers and reviewed the litigation files if the outcome of a case differed from the outcome predicted in our original review.
Results Of the 51 malpractice cases, 46 had been closed as of December 31,1995.
Among these cases, 10 of 24 that we originally identified as involving no adverse event were settled for the plaintiffs (mean payment, $28,760), as were 6 of 13 cases classified as involving adverse events but no negligence (mean payment, $98,192) and 5 of 9 cases in which adverse events due to negligence were found in our assessment (mean payment, $66,944).
Seven of eight claims involving permanent disability were settled for the plaintiffs (mean payment, $201,250).
In a multivariate analysis, disability (permanent vs. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Erreur humaine, Diagnostic, Traitement, Dommage corporel, Relation, Indice gravité, Indemnité dédommagement, Résultat, Homme, Législation
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Human error, Diagnosis, Treatment, Physical injury, Relation, Severity score, Indemnity, Result, Human, Legislation
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 97-0070467
Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 21/05/1997.