TL;DR: For the third time, Law and Contemporary Problems is devoting its attention to the topic of medical malpractice as mentioned in this paper, focusing on the growing influence of outside forces on the malpractice system.
Abstract: For the third time, Law and Contemporary Problems is devoting its attention to the topic of medical malpractice. The first medical malpractice issue of Law and Contemporary Problems explored how paradigms from contract law and private regulation of risk could be better incorporated into existing tort principles to improve the workings of the malpractice system or improve the quality of medical care. The second issue focused on legislative reforms and initiatives that were being actively considered and in some cases implemented by state legislatures or the Congress. This issue reports on the growing influence of outside forces on the malpractice system. Prior to the 1990s, interest in malpractice law was driven almost exclusively by the perception among medical care providers of a “crisis” in malpractice. The crisis mentality resulted in extensive legislative debates relating to a host of reform issues. Throughout the mid-1970s and 1980s, political interest and legislative activity in this area was high. Although the reform mentality has definitely cooled over the past few years, like a dormant volcano, the potential of another eruption remains ever possible should insurance rates or claims spike upwards. This current period of dormancy is due, in large part, to the general availability of malpractice insurance—the fuel for past tort reform efforts supported by physicians—at relatively constant if not decreasing costs. Over this same period, malpractice-specific legislation has also decreased, which may be due to the medical establishment’s resignation that tort reform
TL;DR: Claims that lack evidence of error are not uncommon, but most are denied compensation, and the vast majority of expenditures go toward litigation over errors and payment of them.
Abstract: Background In the current debate over tort reform, critics of the medical malpractice system charge that frivolous litigation — claims that lack evidence of injury, substandard care, or both — is common and costly. Methods Trained physicians reviewed a random sample of 1452 closed malpractice claims from five liability insurers to determine whether a medical injury had occurred and, if so, whether it was due to medical error. We analyzed the prevalence, characteristics, litigation outcomes, and costs of claims that lacked evidence of error. Results For 3 percent of the claims, there were no verifiable medical injuries, and 37 percent did not involve errors. Most of the claims that were not associated with errors (370 of 515 [72 percent]) or injuries (31 of 37 [84 percent]) did not result in compensation; most that involved injuries due to error did (653 of 889 [73 percent]). Payment of claims not involving errors occurred less frequently than did the converse form of inaccuracy — nonpayment of claims asso...
TL;DR: It is concluded that liability reforms can reduce defensive medical practices and that malpractice reforms that directly reduce provider liability pressure lead to reductions of 5 to 9 percent in medical expenditures without substantial effects on mortality or medical complications.
Abstract: "Defensive medicine" is a potentially serious social problem: if fear of liability drives health care providers to administer treatments that do not have worthwhile medical benefits, then the current liability system may generate inefficiencies much larger than the costs of compensating malpractice claimants. To obtain direct empirical evidence on this question, we analyze the effects of malpractice liability reforms using data on all elderly Medicare beneficiaries treated for serious heart disease in 1984, 1987, and 1990. We find that malpractice reforms that directly reduce provider liability pressure lead to reductions of 5 to 9 percent in medical expenditures without substantial effects on mortality or medical complications. We conclude that liability reforms can reduce defensive medical practices.
TL;DR: For example, this paper found that reform of the Joint and Several Liability Rule (or the "deep pockets rule") reduces complications of labor and procedure use, whereas caps on noneconomic damages increase them.
Abstract: In the 1980s and 1990s many states adopted tort reforms. It has been argued that these reforms have reduced the practice of defensive medicine arising from excess tort liability. We find that this does not appear to be true for a large and important class of cases—childbirth in the United States. Using data from national vital statistics natality files on millions of individual births from 1989 to 2001, we ask whether specific tort reforms affect the types of procedures that are performed, and the health outcomes of mothers and their infants. We find that reform of the Joint and Several Liability rule (or the "deep pockets rule") reduces complications of labor and procedure use, whereas caps on noneconomic damages increase them. We show that these results are consistent with a model of tort reform that explicitly allows for variations in patient condition.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare the performance of the political process, the market process, and the courts in a comparative analysis of institutional performance, and conclude that "taking institutional choice seriously seriously is worth taking seriously".
Abstract: Preface Pt. I: Deciding Who Decides: The Comparative Analysis of Institutional Performance 1: Taking Institutional Choice Seriously 2: Social Goals and Public Policies: Bridging the Gap between Them Pt. II: Who Plays, Who Doesn't: The Participation-Centered Approach to the Political Process, the Market, and the Courts 3: The Political Process: The Power of the Few and the Power of the Many 4: The Market Process: Transaction Costs and Transaction Benefits 5: The Courts as an Institution: The Structure and Scale of Justice Pt. III: Applications: Weighing the Relative Merits of Institutions 6: Safety, Tort Law, and Tort Reform 7: Constitutional Law and Constitution Making 8: American Constitutional Law: The Contours of Judicial Review 9: Summary and Conclusion: Propositions Audiences, and Reformations Author Index Subject Index