Defensive medicine

Last updated

Defensive medicine, also called defensive medical decision making, refers to the practice of recommending a diagnostic test or medical treatment that is not necessarily the best option for the patient, but mainly serves to protect the physician against the patient as potential plaintiff. Defensive medicine is a reaction to the rising costs of malpractice insurance premiums and patients’ biases on suing for missed or delayed diagnosis or treatment but not for being overdiagnosed.

Contents

Physicians in the United States are at highest risk of being sued, and overtreatment is common. The number of lawsuits against physicians in the USA has had a substantial impact on the behavior of physicians and medical practice. Physicians order tests and avoid treating high-risk patients (when they have a choice) to reduce their exposure to lawsuits, or are forced to discontinue practicing because of overly high insurance premiums. [1] This behavior has become known as defensive medicine, "a deviation from sound medical practice that is indicated primarily by a threat of liability".

In India, a rise of physical attacks on practitioners and lack of support from public and government systems are the prime reasons for defensive medicine.

Forms

Defensive medicine takes two main forms: assurance behavior and avoidance behavior. Assurance behavior involves the charging of additional, unnecessary services to a) reduce adverse outcomes, b) deter patients from filing medical malpractice claims, or c) preempt any future legal action by documenting that the practitioner is practicing according to the standard of care. Avoidance behavior occurs when providers refuse to participate in high risk procedures or circumstances. [1]

Examples

In 2004, the case of Dr. Daniel Merenstein triggered an intensive debate in scientific journals and media on defensive medicine (e.g., [2] [3] ) Following the guidelines of several well-respected national organizations, Merenstein had explained the pros and cons of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to a patient, rather than simply ordering the test. He then documented the shared decision not to order the test. Later, the patient was diagnosed with incurable advanced prostate cancer, and Merenstein and his residency were sued for not ordering the test. Although Merenstein was acquitted, his residency was found liable for $1 million. [4] Ever since this ordeal, he regards his patients as potential plaintiffs: 'I order more tests now, am more nervous around patients: I am no longer the doctor I should be'. [5]

Rates of Caesarean section have been found to increase by an average of 8% as seen after 2.5 years following a related medical error. [6]

In a study with 824 US surgeons, obstetricians, and other specialists at high risk of litigation, 93% reported practicing defensive medicine, such as ordering unnecessary CT scans, biopsies, and MRIs, and prescribing more antibiotics than medically indicated. [1] In Switzerland, where litigation is less common, 41% of general practitioners and 43% of internists, reported that they sometimes or often recommend PSA tests for legal reasons. [7]

The practice of defensive medicine also expresses itself in discrepancies between what treatments doctors recommend to patients, and what they recommend to their own families. In Switzerland, for instance, the rate of hysterectomy in the general population is 16%, whereas among female doctors and female partners of doctors it is only 10%. [8]

Consequences

Financial

Defensive medical decision making has spread to many areas of clinical medicine and is seen as a major factor in the increase in health care costs, estimated at tens of billions of dollars annually in the US. [9] An analysis of a random sample of 1452 closed malpractice claims from five U.S. liability insurers showed that the average time between injury and resolution was 5 years. [10] Indemnity costs were $376 million, and defense administration cost $73 million, resulting in total costs of $449 million. The system's overhead costs were exorbitant: 35% of the indemnity payments went to the plaintiffs' attorneys, and together with defense costs, the total costs of litigation amounted to 54% of the compensation paid to plaintiffs.

Patient care

Theoretical arguments based on utilitarianism conclude that defensive medicine is, on average, harmful to patients. [11] Malpractice suits are often seen as a mechanism to improve the quality of care, but with custom-based liability, they actually impede the translation of evidence into practice, harming patients and decreasing the quality of care. Tort law in many countries and jurisdictions not only discourages but actively penalizes physicians who practice evidence-based medicine. [12]

Similar phenomena outside healthcare

Defensive decision making does not only occur in health care but also in business and politics. For instance, managers of large international companies report making defensive decisions in one third to half of all cases, on average. [13] That means, these managers pursue options that are second best for their company but protect themselves in case something goes wrong.

Related Research Articles

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is "the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients". The aim of EBM is to integrate the experience of the clinician, the values of the patient, and the best available scientific information to guide decision-making about clinical management. The term was originally used to describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.

Internal medicine, also known as general internal medicine in Commonwealth nations, is a medical specialty for medical doctors focused on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of internal diseases. Medical practitioners of internal medicine are referred to as internists, or physicians in Commonwealth nations. Internists possess specialized skills in managing patients with undifferentiated or multi-system disease processes. They provide care to both hospitalized (inpatient) and ambulatory (outpatient) patients and often contribute significantly to teaching and research. Internists are qualified physicians who have undergone postgraduate training in internal medicine, and should not be confused with "interns”, a term commonly used for a medical doctor who has obtained a medical degree but does not yet have a license to practice medicine unsupervised.

A medical error is a preventable adverse effect of care ("iatrogenesis"), whether or not it is evident or harmful to the patient. This might include an inaccurate or incomplete diagnosis or treatment of a disease, injury, syndrome, behavior, infection, or other ailment.

Medical malpractice is professional negligence by act or omission by a health care provider in which the treatment provided falls below the accepted standard of practice in the medical community and causes injury or death to the patient, with most cases involving medical error. Claims of medical malpractice, when pursued in US courts, are processed as civil torts. Sometimes an act of medical malpractice will also constitute a criminal act, as in the case of the death of Michael Jackson.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primary care physician</span> US term for medical professional providing first-line care

A primary care physician (PCP) is a physician who provides both the first contact for a person with an undiagnosed health concern as well as continuing care of varied medical conditions, not limited by cause, organ system, or diagnosis. The term is primarily used in the United States. In the past, the equivalent term was 'general practitioner' in the US; however in the United Kingdom and other countries the term general practitioner is still used. With the advent of nurses as PCPs, the term PCP has also been expanded to denote primary care providers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">College of Family Physicians of Canada</span> Professional organization

The College of Family Physicians of Canada is a professional association and the legal certifying body for the practice of family medicine in Canada. This national organization of family physicians was founded in 1954 and incorporated in 1968. Although membership is not mandatory to practice medicine, it currently numbers over 38,000 members. Members of the CFPC belong to the national College, as well as to their provincial or territorial chapters. The CFPC uses both English and French as official communication languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Non-economic damages caps</span> Limitations in lawsuits

Non-economic damages caps are tort reforms to limit damages in lawsuits for subjective, non-pecuniary harms such as pain, suffering, inconvenience, emotional distress, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium, and loss of enjoyment of life. This is opposed to economic damages, which encompasses pecuniary harms such as medical bills, lost wages, lost future income, loss of use of property, costs of repair or replacement, the economic value of domestic services, and loss of employment or business opportunities. Non-economic damages should not be confused with punitive or exemplary damages, which are awarded purely to penalise defendants and do not aim to compensate either pecuniary or non-pecuniary losses.

Humanistic medicine is an interdisciplinary field in the medical practice of clinical care popular in the modern health systems of developed countries.

Patient safety is a discipline that emphasizes safety in health care through the prevention, reduction, reporting and analysis of error and other types of unnecessary harm that often lead to adverse patient events. The frequency and magnitude of avoidable adverse events, often known as patient safety incidents, experienced by patients was not well known until the 1990s, when multiple countries reported significant numbers of patients harmed and killed by medical errors. Recognizing that healthcare errors impact 1 in every 10 patients around the world, the World Health Organization (WHO) calls patient safety an endemic concern. Indeed, patient safety has emerged as a distinct healthcare discipline supported by an immature yet developing scientific framework. There is a significant transdisciplinary body of theoretical and research literature that informs the science of patient safety with mobile health apps being a growing area of research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tort reform</span> Legal reforms aimed at reducing tort litigation

Tort reform consists of changes in the civil justice system in common law countries that aim to reduce the ability of plaintiffs to bring tort litigation or to reduce damages they can receive. Such changes are generally justified under the grounds that litigation is an inefficient means to compensate plaintiffs; that tort law permits frivolous or otherwise undesirable litigation to crowd the court system; or that the fear of litigation can serve to curtail innovation, raise the cost of consumer goods or insurance premiums for suppliers of services, and increase legal costs for businesses. Tort reform has primarily been prominent in common law jurisdictions, where criticism of judge-made rules regarding tort actions manifests in calls for statutory reform by the legislature.

The doctor–patient relationship is a central part of health care and the practice of medicine. A doctor–patient relationship is formed when a doctor attends to a patient's medical needs and is usually through consent. This relationship is built on trust, respect, communication, and a common understanding of both the doctor and patients' sides. The trust aspect of this relationship goes is mutual: the doctor trusts the patient to reveal any information that may be relevant to the case, and in turn, the patient trusts the doctor to respect their privacy and not disclose this information to outside parties.

John E. "Jack" Wennberg is the pioneer and leading researcher of unwarranted variation in the healthcare industry. In four decades of work, Wennberg has documented the geographic variation in the healthcare that patients receive in the United States. In 1988, he founded the Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences at Dartmouth Medical School to address that unwarranted variation in healthcare.

In economics, supplier induced demand (SID) may occur when asymmetry of information exists between supplier and consumer. The supplier can use superior information to encourage an individual to demand a greater quantity of the good or service they supply than the Pareto efficient level, should asymmetric information not exist. The result of this is a welfare loss.

Shared decision-making in medicine (SDM) is a process in which both the patient and physician contribute to the medical decision-making process and agree on treatment decisions. Health care providers explain treatments and alternatives to patients and help them choose the treatment option that best aligns with their preferences as well as their unique cultural and personal beliefs.

Clinical peer review, also known as medical peer review is the process by which health care professionals, including those in nursing and pharmacy, evaluate each other's clinical performance. A discipline-specific process may be referenced accordingly.

David M. Eddy is an American physician, mathematician, and healthcare analyst who has done seminal work in mathematical modeling of diseases, clinical practice guidelines, and evidence-based medicine. Four highlights of his career have been summarized by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences: "more than 25 years ago, Eddy wrote the seminal paper on the role of guidelines in medical decision-making, the first Markov model applied to clinical problems, and the original criteria for coverage decisions; he was the first to use and publish the term 'evidence-based'."

Unnecessary health care is health care provided with a higher volume or cost than is appropriate. In the United States, where health care costs are the highest as a percentage of GDP, overuse was the predominant factor in its expense, accounting for about a third of its health care spending in 2012.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Choosing Wisely</span> U.S.-based educational campaign

Choosing Wisely is a United States-based health educational campaign, led by the ABIM Foundation, about unnecessary health care.

Health care quality is a level of value provided by any health care resource, as determined by some measurement. As with quality in other fields, it is an assessment of whether something is good enough and whether it is suitable for its purpose. The goal of health care is to provide medical resources of high quality to all who need them; that is, to ensure good quality of life, cure illnesses when possible, to extend life expectancy, and so on. Researchers use a variety of quality measures to attempt to determine health care quality, including counts of a therapy's reduction or lessening of diseases identified by medical diagnosis, a decrease in the number of risk factors which people have following preventive care, or a survey of health indicators in a population who are accessing certain kinds of care.

Overscreening, also called unnecessary screening, is the performance of medical screening without a medical indication to do so. Screening is a medical test in a healthy person who is showing no symptoms of a disease and is intended to detect a disease so that a person may prepare to respond to it. Screening is indicated in people who have some threshold risk for getting a disease, but is not indicated in people who are unlikely to develop a disease. Overscreening is a type of unnecessary health care.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Studdert D. M.; Mello M. M.; Sage W. M.; DesRoches C. M.; Peugh J.; Zapert K.; Brennan T. A. (2005). "Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment". JAMA. 293 (21): 2609–2617. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.21.2609 . PMID   15928282.
  2. Hurwitz B (2004). "How does evidence based guidance influence determinations of medical negligence?". British Medical Journal. 329 (7473): 1024–1028. doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7473.1024. PMC   524559 . PMID   15514351.
  3. Atkins D., Siegel J., Slutsky J. (2005). "Making policy when the evidence is in dispute". Health Affairs. 24 (1): 102–113. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.102 . PMID   15647220.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. Merenstein D (7 January 2004). "A piece of my mind. Winners and losers". JAMA. 291 (1): 15–16. doi:10.1001/jama.291.1.15. PMID   14709561.
  5. Lapp, T. (2005) Clinical guidelines in court: it’s a tug of war. American Academy of Family Physicians Report, 2005. Available at: "Clinical Guidelines in Court: It's a Tug of War -- American Academy of Family Physicians". Archived from the original on 2005-04-10. Retrieved 2014-01-16. (last accessed 12 February 2008).
  6. Shurtz, Ity (2013). "The impact of medical errors on physician behavior: Evidence from malpractice litigation". Journal of Health Economics. 32 (2): 331–340. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.11.011. ISSN   0167-6296. PMID   23328349.
  7. Steurer J.; Held U.; Schmidt M.; Gigerenzer G.; Tag B.; Bachmann L. M. (2009). "Legal concerns trigger PSA testing". Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 15 (2): 390–392. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01024.x. hdl: 11858/00-001M-0000-0024-F6E3-D . PMID   19335502.
  8. Domenighetti G.; Casabianca A.; Gutzwiller F.; Martinoli S. (1993). "Revisiting the most informed consumer of surgical services: The physician-patient" (PDF). International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 9 (4): 505–513. doi:10.1017/s0266462300005420. PMID   8288426. S2CID   34712169.
  9. Anderson R. E. (1999). "Billions for defense: the pervasive nature of defensive medicine". Archives of Internal Medicine. 159 (20): 2399–2402. doi:10.1001/archinte.159.20.2399. PMID   10665887.
  10. Studdert D. M.; Mello M.M.; Gawande A. A.; Gandhi T.K.; Kachalia A.; Yoon C.; Puopolo A. L.; Brennan T.A. (2006). "Claims, errors, and compensation payments in medical malpractice litigation". New England Journal of Medicine. 354 (19): 2024–33. doi: 10.1056/nejmsa054479 . PMID   16687715.
  11. DeKay ML, Asch DA (1998). "Is the defensive use of diagnostic tests good for patients, or bad?". Med Decis Making. 18 (1): 19–28. doi:10.1177/0272989x9801800105. PMID   9456202. S2CID   10048894.
  12. Monahan J (2007). "Statistical literacy. A prerequisite for evidence-based medicine". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 8 (2): i–ii. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2008.00033_1.x . PMID   26161750.
  13. Gigerenzer, G. (2014) Risk savvy: How to make good decisions. New York: Viking.