Medical Malpractice claims are frequently asserted in the United States. At various time and places, an extraordinarily high number of claims and payouts led to what some have called medical malpractice crises. Consequently, in some geographical locations physicians either could not purchase malpractice insurance as carriers withdrew from the market, or, insurance became increasingly expensive and the overall costs associated with the delivery of health care continued to rise. Other undesirable consequences of these crises included a shortage of qualified physicians in certain parts of the country. Many of the states responded to these problems legislatively through a long series of tort reform measures. The health care industry itself has evolved in numerous ways. In particular, many health care providers have turned away from traditional private insurance models to self-insured models such as captives. Further, the industry has continued to consolidate, with fewer, but larger hospitals and clinics, and with an increasing number of physicians employed directly by hospitals and large clinics. The results of all of these changes have had mixed results.
Abstract
Tort reformers blame the high cost of American health care on defensive responses to rampant medical malpractice litigation. Defenders of the tort system counter that holding health care providers liable for negligence improves safety and ensures compensation for injury. The relationship between medical malpractice and health care expenditures is more complex than either of these positions reflects. The existing medical malpractice system increases medical spending mainly because it has evolved in tandem with other inflationary features of the health care system and may make those features even more difficult to change. In other words, medical malpractice is both a symptom of a costly health care system and a costly disease in its own right.
AbstractFifteen states have created Patient Compensation Funds in response to the increased cost and reduced availability of medical malpractice insurance associated with the so-called “medical malpractice crisis.” Patient Compensation Fund statutes limit health care providers’ liability to a specified amount, and establish state-administered funds to compensate victorious malpractice plaintiffs for damage awards in excess of that amount.This Note examines the Patient Compensation Fund mechanism, evaluates its effectiveness as a compensation system for malpractice victims, and recommends particular provisions that might enhance its effectiveness. The Note concludes that the Patient Compensation Fund mechanism is an effective means of increasing the availability and of reducing the cost of medical malpractice insurance, and should be adopted by other states experiencing a “medical malpractice crisis.”
AbstractIn the 1970's, Michigan and other states were confronted with a medical malpractice crisis of astronomical proportions. The escalating number of medical malpractice lawsuits and concomitant increase in malpractice premiums for health care providers fostered a divisive climate among doctors, lawyers and patients. In response to this crisis, the Michigan legislature enacted the Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act. The Act establishes a process whereby patients may agree to arbitrate any claims rather than pursue them through the courts.Part II of this Article discusses the historical evolution of arbitration as a precursor to its establishment as a resolution modality for health care disputes. Part III describes the statutory framework of the Michigan Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act. Part IV discusses the contractual and constitutional challenges to the arbitration statute and their resolution in Morris v. Metriyakool.As the law respecting arbitration becomes less vulnerable to judicial perforation, this Author suggests that other jurisdictions treat the Michigan Medical Arbitration Program as an archetype, susceptible to replication.
Telemedicine became a significant part of the health care equation long before we realized what it was or how important it will be in the future. Telephone discussions and consultations between health care providers have been a part of medical practice since Alexander Graham Bell gifted society with telephones. Furthermore, who among us has not been transfixed watching and learning about open heart surgery on cable television? Propelled by the information superhighway and the breadth of emerging computer and communication technologies, telemedicine will change the face of medicine and methods of interaction between providers and patients. Access, quality and cost of health care may all improve, but not without the sacrifice of some time-honored norms in medical practice.
The Supreme Court of California held, in Delaney v. Baker, 82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 610 (1999), that the heightened remedies available under the Elder Abuse Act (Act), Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 15657,15657.2 (West 1998), apply to health care providers who engage in reckless neglect of an elder adult. The court interpreted two sections of the Act: (1) section 15657, which provides for enhanced remedies for reckless neglect; and (2) section 15657.2, which limits recovery for actions based on “professional negligence.” The court held that reckless neglect is distinct from professional negligence and therefore the restrictions on remedies against health care providers for professional negligence are inapplicable.Kay Delaney sued Meadowood, a skilled nursing facility (SNF), after a resident, her mother, died. Evidence at trial indicated that Rose Wallien, the decedent, was left lying in her own urine and feces for extended periods of time and had stage I11 and IV pressure sores on her ankles, feet, and buttocks at the time of her death.
Important initiatives in health care include (a) improving access to services for disadvantaged populations, (b) providing equal access for individuals with limited or non-English proficiency, and (c) ensuring cultural competence of health-care providers to facilitate effective services for individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Minority Health, 2001). This article provides a brief overview of the use of technology by speech-language pathologists and audiologists to extend their services to underserved populations who live in remote geographic areas, or when cultural and linguistic differences impact service delivery.
In a changing economy and a changing industry, health care providers need to complete thorough, comprehensive, and efficient assessments that provide both an accurate depiction of the patient's deficits and a blueprint to the path of treatment for older adults. Through standardized testing and observations as well as the goals and evidenced-based treatment plans we have devised, health care providers can maximize outcomes and the functional levels of patients. In this article, we review an interdisciplinary assessment that involves speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, physical therapy, and respiratory therapy to work with older adults in health care settings. Using the approach, we will examine the benefits of collaboration between disciplines, an interdisciplinary screening process, and the importance of sharing information from comprehensive discipline-specific evaluations. We also will discuss the importance of having an understanding of the varied scopes of practice, the utilization of outcome measurement tools, and a patient-centered assessment approach to care.
An Overview of Medical Malpractice Law in the United States Including Legislative and the Health Care Industry’s Responses to Increased Claims