Chapter 4.A--Medical Mistakes, and Malpractice Litigation
A ground-breaking study of 6,712 medical records reported that, over a
broad range of situations, patients in the U.S. receive only about 55%
of the care recommended by various quality guidelines. Elizabeth
A. McGlynn, et al., The Quality of Health Care Delivered to Adults in
the
United States, 348 New Eng. J. Med. 2635 (2003); Steven M. Asch, et
al., Who is at Greatest Risk for Receiving Poor-Quality Health Care?,
354 New Eng. J. Med. 1147 (2006). Additional
discussions
of medical error and measuring and improving quality can be found at
Sheila
Leatherman and Douglas McCarthy, Quality
of Health Care in the United States: A Chartbook (2002); Symposium,
22(2) Health Affairs (March 2003); Symposium, 46
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 1 (Winter 2003); Rosemary Gibson
& Janardan Prasad
Singh, Wall of Silence: The Untold Story of Medical Mistakes that Kill
and Injure Millions of Americans (Lifeline Press, 2003); Robert M.
Wachter & Kaveh G. Shojania, Internal Bleeding: The Truth Behind
America's Terrifying Epidemic of Medical Mistakes (Rugged Land, 2004);
Lori Andrews, Studying Medical Error in
Situ: Implications for Malpractice Law and Policy, 54 Depaul L. Rev. 358 (2005).
Charles Bosk's classic study of how medical professionals respond to
error has been reissued in a 2nd edition, Forgine and Remember:
Managing
Medical Failure (2003).
Questioning whether the threat of malpractice liability actually
deters reporting of medical errors and efforts to improve quality, see
David A. Hyman & Charles Silver, The Poor State of Health Care
Quality in the U.S.: Is Malpractice Liability Part of the Problem or
Part of the Solution?, 90 Corn. L. Rev. 893 (2005). Questioning
much of the conventional wisdom and popular perception about many
aspects of medical malprcatice, and reviewing the Harvard study
extensively, see Thomas Baker, The Medical Malpractice Myth (2005).
Whether and how patients should be told about medical errors is
receiving additional attention. K.M. Mazor, et al., Communicating
with Patients about Medical Errors: A Review of the Literature, 164
Arch. Intern. Med. 1690 (2003); K. M. Mazor, et al., Health
Plan Members' Views about Disclosure of Medical Errors, 140 Ann.
Intern.
Med. 409 (2004); Bryan A. Liang &
LiLan Ren, Medical Liability Insurance and Damage Caps: Getting Beyond
Band Aids to Substantive Systems Treatment to Improve Quality and
Safety in Healthcare, 30 Am. J. L. & Med. 501 (2004); Carol B.
Liebman & Chris Stern Hyman, Medical Error Disclosure,
Mediation Skills, and Malpractice Litigation (July 2005).
Thomas H. Gallagher and colleagues document that, due to liability
risks,
when physicians discuss their mistakes with patients, they are
reluctant
to apologize, clearly describe the source and nature of the error, or
otherwise
fully fully meet the patient's or family's emotional needs to come to
terms
with the error. Thomas H. Gallagher et al., Patients’ and Physicians’
Attitudes Regarding the Disclosure of Medial Errors, 289 JAMA 1001
(2003).
There is growing interest in the appropriateness and success of
using
formal apologies to head off medical malpractice
litigation:
Doctors' apologies for medical mistakes
may not be a cure-all for litigation, but explaining unforeseen
outcomes and making early settlement offers have proven effective, say
lawyers who have participated in the process in the last decade. The
concept is called 'full disclosure/early offer,' and it's spreading.
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' Veterans Health
Administration--as well as a number of hospital systems and insurers
across the nation--are among the entities that have adopted variations
of the policy. . . . Plaintiffs' and defense attorneys agree that
the program--often referred to as Sorry Works! from The Sorry Works!
Coalition, . . . --is a sound strategy miscast in the public perception
as a touchy-feely ritual. . . . [H]ealth care providers willing to
admit when they have made an error and quickly get on top of it cut
down on the anger that leads to litigation. . . .
Michael A. Stidham, whose Jackson, Ky., practice includes representing
Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.) patients, has settled three cases
with the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Lexington, Ky.--two
on the same morning--and lost a bench trial in a medical
malpractice case that involved a suicide. Stidham said that he likes
the system and thinks that its wider application could help to
reduce docket backlogs. In contrast, a case against a local hospital
can take three to four years to get to trial. 'The only thing I
really find lacking in it at this point is that I don't believe they
tell the prospective plaintiffs that they have the right to discuss
their offers with an attorney. A lot of men and women don't understand
why they're receiving these offers,' he said. Stidham noted that 'I
didn't always get everything I wanted, but I didn't leave with a bad
taste in my mouth, and left with a satisfied client, which is the most
important thing.'
Ginny M. Hamm, the special assistant U.S. attorney assigned to
the V.A. medical center in Lexington who worked with the former
hospital chief of staff, Dr. Steve S. Kraman, to introduce a centerwide
disclosure program in 1987, said that a full and lengthy explanation
always precedes an offer. Since Hamm did her first disclosure case in
1989, the 'golden rule' has been to tell veterans or their families
that they should seek counsel when the hospital meets with them to
disclose what went wrong, she said. Kraman, as chief of staff, would
speak to the veteran and his family on behalf of the entire medical
center, offering an apology and explaining the error, then 'hand off to
me for the settlement,' she said. Hamm added that if the V.A.
determined that no mistake was made, it would hold a 'closure'meeting
explaining its finding to the veteran. Kraman, who now serves on the
board of The Sorry Works! Coalition, said that he was aware of only two
cases in which angry patients sued for damages. 'The vast majority of
people respond in kind. If treated honestly, they don't even want
money. They want to see that some good comes out of a bad situation,'
Kraman said. . . .
Peter Geier, EMERGING MED-MAL STRATEGY: 'I'M SORRY', 27 The National
Law Journal, No. 96, p. 1 (July 17, 2006).
See also Jonathan R. Cohen, Advising Clients to Apologize, 72 S. Cal L.
Rev.
1004,
1009 (1999); G.B. Hickson et al., Factors That Prompted Families to
File
Medical Malpractice Claims Following Perinatal Injuries, 267 JAMA 1359
(1992); Lee Taft, Apology Subverted: The Commodification of Apology,
109
Yale L.J. 1135 (2000); Lee Taft, Apology and Medical Mistake:
Opportunity or Foil?, 14 Ann. Health L. 55 (2005); Douglas N. Frenkel
and Carol B. Liebman, Words
That
Heal, 140 Ann. Inern. Med. 482 (2004); Erin Ann O'Hara, Apology and
Thick
Trust: What Spouse Abusers and Negligent Doctors Might Have in Common,
79 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 1055, 1079-81(2004); K.M. Mazor, et al., Health
Plan Members' Views on Forginiving Medical Errors, 11 Am. J. Manag.
Care 49 (2005); Carol B. Liebman & Chris Stern Hyman, Medical Error Disclosure,
Mediation Skills, and Malpractice Litigation (July 2005).
An interesting study of various attributes of med. mal. plaintiffs
lawyers
found that those with more experience are more successful.
Catherine
T. Harris, Ralph A. Peeples, & Thomas B. Metzloff , Who Are Those
Guys?
An Empirical Examination of Medical Malpractice Plaintiffs' Attorneys,
Wake
Forest Univ. Public Law Research Paper No. 03-09 (2003).
A large and prominent medical group in San Diego
adopted a policy of transferring
patients and all their family members if they file a malpractice claim. In one case, the court ruled that this could
constitute illegal abandonment, interference with the doctor-patient
relationship, and breach of fiduciary duties if the transfer hampered
access to
care or lacked sufficient notice and opportunity to find a new
physician. Scripps Clinic v. Superior
Court, 108
Cal.App.4th 917, 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 101 (Cal.App. 2003).
For additional discussion of the history of
medical malprctice, see Catherine T. Struve, Doctors, The Adversary
System, and Procedural Reform in Medical Liability Litigation, 72
Fordham L. Rev. 944 (2004).
Return to home
page.