Essay On Defensive Medicine

The role of prevention compared to treatment has been debated in the healthcare industry for years. In the United States, health providers have been known to prefer treatment over prevention. The idea of healing or treating pain is more desirable than working to simply avoid it according to (Hackett, 2013). My understanding in the role of prevention vs treatment comes down to personal accountability for patients, and changing the thinking of physicians. Treatment gets reimbursed at a higher rate from Medicare and Medicaid and private insurance coverage than prevention; there is a lower compensation for preventative medicine residency programmes and physicians; and there is relatively little funding for active prevention work (Hackett, 2013).

From a personal standpoint I believe that the excessiveness of litigation is hurting the field of healthcare due to the affects in many different areas. It reduces access that patients need. Due to the misuse and disloyal antics of people making false accusations to self gain we will continue to see a rise in healthcare. I do not feel that all accusations are false, but I do believe that litigation has become successful due to dishonesty. In order for there to be financial distress for us all as a country we must flow diligently with each other. From a malpractice standpoint they need to ensure that their patients are taken care of to the best of their ability and that they are taking the precautions needed to ensure no

Rising health care costs have caused a national crisis, and all agree we must embrace reform. President Obama has initiated his national health care plan in the hopes of decreasing some of the inflated costs. When attempting to resolve this issue, one must always address the root of the problem. A large portion of these inflationary costs stem from malpractice lawsuits, and so begins the debate for tort reform: legislation which would cut the costs of health care by reducing the risk of civil litigation and exposure to fraudulent claims (“What”). However, the real factor at hand and the real cause of the industry’s high costs does not come solely from the cost incurred from these lawsuits, but from over-expenditures on the part of

It is this author’s belief that no entities should stand in the way of an individual’s right to seek counsel, regardless of outcome. The ramifications of not suing a HMO could demonstrate no evidence to support efforts to amend the current law, and without legal documents demonstrating the consequences related to denial of care, the rights of patients, to ensure a safe and effective health care, according to standards of practice, may be compromised.

The defensive medicine strategy may not be cost efficient, but many doctors agree that having the best defense will ultimately result in giving better care. (Bricker,

It also costs 46.5 billion dollars defending medicine. Policy limits for malpractice are 1 million per occurrence, and 3 million dollars a year. The payment for 2015 in Oklahoma was 20-40 million dollars. The payment for 2016 for Oklahoma was 20-40 million dollars as well. In 2017 in Texas was 80-100 million dollars. All these numbers are on an annual rate in the closest state. The website listed the information by state so I went with the closest state to me. So based on the amount of money they have to give up with every malpractice case they try to keep their mistakes secret to avoid law suits. The doctors are like children and to them death is just a toy. That is how they come off refusing to admit their mistakes so they can

In the United States, state laws dictate the abilities and skills medical professional would need to perform in a medical professional’s scope of practice and sets the legal boundaries in which they can work within. Due to an increasing influx of patient care that is needed due to the Affordable Care Act, the scope of practice boundaries are being crossed, which in turn has turned many legislative heads but not in a positive light. Since the issues in medical errors are being brought to the fore front it has become controversial and now legislature is asking the states to look into restructuring the scope of practices in all areas the medical industry. Without restructuring patient care will continue to be poor or inadequate and litigation will continue to rise due to poor patient care, incorrect testing, ineffective specimen collection, missed diagnosis, and poor supervision and communication. Death related cases due to medical errors are the 5th largest in the United States which makes it the 5th leading cause of death in the United States. Many medical errors are actually billed and paid for by insurance companies and the physician receives payment for the errors. The United States spends billions on litigation per year and therefore restructuring the medical industry could save the United States millions of dollars per year and make for a safer over all environment for everyone.

In the state of Alabama in terms of malpractice actions they are steep. The medical liability provisions of the legislation were based on (MICRA) and included a cap of $400,000 on noneconomic damages including punitive damages, collateral source offset, and mandatory sporadic payouts of future damages, (Nelson, L. J., Morrisey, M. A., & Kilgore, M. L., 2007). This was eventually discharged as the Alabama Courts did not approve of this legislation. The reason being is the Alabama Courts did not foresee any substantial evidence that this legislation didn’t reduce malpractice premiums or health care costs. However, in the 1990’s, with more studies, and republican justices supported and insisted on the change for caps on Medicare malpractices. Most recoveries by patients decreased dramatically by $20,000 after the enactment of the damages cap and increased by twice following judicial nullification. That is a huge gap compared to other states and malpractice cases that don’t have a big recovery length of time. Medical malpractice in Pennsylvania indicates lawsuits are not responsible for rising medical malpractice insurance premiums in Pennsylvania, (The Facts about Medical Malpractice in Pennsylvania, 2004). It’s all because of declining medical malpractice awards and per Pennsylvania physicians has decreased in the early 90’s and 2000’s. Additionally, the number of million-dollar jury verdicts fell by 50 percent 2000 to 2002, according to (The Facts about Medical Malpractice in Pennsylvania,

Physicians have been known to use Defensive medicine techniques to help guard themselves against malpractice lawsuits. The problem with using defensive medicine techniques is that it is regarded as prescribing unnessary test, procedures, and checkup appointments (chap. 12). All of these added unnecessary medical treatment and documentation contributes to the growing cost of health care in the United States (U.S.) (chap. 12). Physicians who use the defensive medicine techniques also have a higher risk of having a malpractice lawsuit that will lead to malpractice awards and an increase in insurance premiums that will add to the increase in health care costs (chap. 12). Even though the defensive medicine is viewed as an intervention, it is

The title of the text is "Damage Caps and Civil Litigation: An Empirical Study of Medical Malpractice Litigation in the South" and is about "the effect that damage caps have on plaintiffs' recovery in medical malpractice litigation, using a unique data set of litigation in the South, from 1987 to 1999."(Yoon, 2001).

Many physicians feels and demontrates frustration on the changes and lost control of the practice of medicine to business interests. Accustomed to having the authority to make decisisons about the best care for their patients, they are now questioned and scrutized on the treatments they provide for and care for their patients.

Today, the medical industry has been transformed. Doctors must live by a different code of ethics other than their oath. Legal fear has put the doctor-patient relationship in jeopardy. Today, physicians view patients as potential malpractice litigants. Therefore, doctors order unnecessary

Lastly and not mentioned earlier, is the insurance companies. Malpractice insurance is outrageous and the cost has actually put facilities out of business. This causes a vicious cycle. Doctors are required to carry ungodly malpractice insurance, in turn hospital costs go up, in turn patient insurance premiums go up. It will all eventually fall onto all patients everywhere.

The same World Health Organization presentation details the cost of medical litigation rising from $3 billion per year to $24 billion per year between 1975 and 2002 (Dietrich, 2005, pg. 27). The amounts awarded in medical lawsuits have an impact on healthcare delivery in the form of increased insurance costs to the consumer and doctor, or a reduction in services to help cover the cost of litigation. A survey conducted by the Massachusetts Medical Society (MMS) asked 900 physicians if they had practiced defensive medicine procedures. Eighty-three percent of the doctors reported that they had ordered defensive procedures an average of 18 to 28 percent of the time. They also indicated they had ordered hospitalizations about 13 percent of the time to avoid potential lawsuits. The MMS estimates that the excess procedures cost the state at least $1.4 billion a year, and the group believes that amount is an underestimate due to only 46 percent of doctors in the state participating in the survey (Gulla, 2008).

I can certainly understand why physicians practice defensive medicine and it is probably a necessity if standing in their shoes nowadays. While imaging may quickly provide additional diagnostic information in the ER and offer a deterrent to lawsuits, I feel there should be checks to avoid indiscriminate ordering without sound medical reasoning. It doesn’t seem as though a path to correcting over-utilization in an ER setting would be easy to