The Experts below are selected from a list of 1722 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Clare Dyer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
england s Clinical Negligence system needs urgent reform say medical organisations
BMJ, 2021Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association, and the Medical Defence Union (MDU) are seeking urgent reform of the Clinical Negligence system in England, which has seen the estimated bill for outstanding claims rise to an “unsustainable” £84bn (€97.7bn; $118.4bn). The organisations made the call in a joint letter to the prime minister, Boris Johnson, with a copy sent to the health and social care secretary for England, Matt Hancock. The MDU has long campaigned for reform of the current system, whose burgeoning cost represents “the …
-
court to hear Clinical Negligence case after remote trial is deemed undesirable
BMJ, 2020Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The first Clinical Negligence trial to go to the High Court since the covid-19 lockdown closed the courts in the UK will start on 8 June. The trial had been due to take place by video conferencing, but University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust applied for it to be adjourned to a later date, arguing that a remote hearing would be unfair. One of the clinicians whose treatment is at issue in the Negligence claim maintained that he would be unable to give as full an account of his actions by video link as at a court hearing, …
-
government considers legal reforms to resolve high cost of Clinical Negligence claims
BMJ, 2019Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The UK government is considering reforms to the legal process for resolving Clinical Negligence claims after concluding that making care safer will not be enough to curb the burgeoning costs of compensation. Dianne Kennard, who heads a cross government working group on how to tackle the rising costs, told a Westminster Forum seminar that there was a “strong case for legal reform.” Kennard, who works on litigation policy for the Department of Health and Social Care, said the current rise in costs was “unsustainable.” Payouts from the Clinical Negligence scheme for NHS trusts, which covers hospital …
-
women who become infertile through hospital Negligence can seek surrogacy abroad court rules
BMJ, 2018Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:Women whose fertility is destroyed by Clinical Negligence will have greater rights to damages covering the costs of surrogacy, after a landmark ruling by the Court of Appeal.1 Three judges have ruled that a High Court judge was wrong to hold that a trust which admitted negligently leaving a childless woman infertile need pay for surrogacy only in the UK and not abroad, with the woman’s own eggs and not those of a donor. The unnamed woman, now 35, was diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer at the age of 29. Whittington Hospital NHS Trust in London had failed to detect cancer despite smear tests in 2008 …
-
indemnity provider calls for urgent reform of Negligence payouts
BMJ, 2017Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The spiralling cost of Clinical Negligence claims in England will become unsustainable unless the government reforms the system as a matter of urgency, a leading doctors’ indemnity organisation has argued at the launch of a new campaign.1 The Medical Protection Society (MPS) points to statistics showing that the NHS in England will be paying out £2.6bn (€3bn; $3.3bn) a year by 2022 if spending continues to rise at the rate it has done over the past five years. Over that period payouts went up by 72%, and current annual spending equates to the cost of training 6500 new doctors.2 But the spending spiral has been accelerated by a new rule that came into effect in …
John T Machin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what can be learned from litigation in otology a review of Clinical Negligence claims in england 2013 2018
Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 2021Co-Authors: F Mcclenaghan, Timothy W R Briggs, John T Machin, Andrew Marshall, Annakan Victor NavaratnamAbstract:Background Litigation in the National Health Service continues to rise with a 9.4 per cent increase in Clinical Negligence claims from the period 2018 and 2019 to the period 2019 and 2020. The cost of these claims now accounts for 1.8 per cent of the National Health Service 2019 to 2020 budget. This study aimed to identify the characteristics of Clinical Negligence claims in the subspecialty of otology. Methods This study was a retrospective review of all Clinical Negligence claims in otology in England held by National Health Service Resolution between April 2013 and April 2018. Results There were 171 claims in otology, 24 per cent of all otolaryngology claims, with a potential cost of £24.5 million. Over half of these were associated with hearing loss. Stapedectomy was the highest mean cost per claim operation at £769 438. The most common reasons for litigation were failure or delay in treatment (23 per cent), failure or delay in diagnosis (20 per cent), intra-operative complications (15 per cent) and inadequate consent (13 per cent). Conclusion There is a risk of high-cost claims in otology, especially with objective injuries such as hearing loss and facial nerve injury.
-
otorhinolaryngology litigation in england 727 Clinical Negligence cases against the national health service
Clinical Otolaryngology, 2021Co-Authors: Annakan Victor Navaratnam, Ahmad Hariri, John T Machin, Timothy W R Briggs, Andrew MarshallAbstract:INTRODUCTION Litigation against the National Health Service (NHS) in England is rising. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of otorhinolaryngology Clinical Negligence claims in England. METHODS A retrospective review was undertaken of all Clinical Negligence claims in England held by NHS Resolution relating to otorhinolaryngology between April 2013 and April 2018. Analysis was performed using information for cause, patient injury and claim cost. Where claim information was adequately detailed, the authors categorised claims by subspecialty, diagnosis and surgery. RESULTS A total number of 727 claims were identified with an estimated potential cost of £108 million. Out of these, 463 were closed claims. Including open claim reserves, the mean cost of a claim was £148 923. Head and neck surgery was the subspecialty with the highest number of claims (n = 313, 43%) and highest cost (£51.5 million) followed by otology (n = 171, £24.5 million) and rhinology (n = 171, £13.6 million). Over half of claims were associated with an operation (n = 429, 59%) where mastoid surgery (n = 46) and endoscopic sinus surgery (n = 46) were equally associated with the greatest number of claims. The most frequent causes for Clinical Negligence claims included failure or delay to diagnose (n = 178, 25%), failure or delay to treat (n = 136, 19%), intra-operative complications (n = 130, 18%) and failure of the consent process (n = 107, 15%). DISCUSSION Clinical Negligence claims in otorhinolaryngology are related to several different components of patient management and are not limited to postoperative complications. This study highlights the importance of robust pathways in out-patient diagnostics and the consenting process in order to deliver better patient care and reduce the impact of litigation. Keywords informed consent, malpractice, Clinical Negligence claims, litigation, otolaryngology.
-
otolaryngology litigation in england 727 Clinical Negligence cases against the nhs
Authorea Preprints, 2020Co-Authors: Annakan Victor Navaratnam, Ahmad Hariri, John T Machin, Andrew Marshall, Timothy W R BriggsAbstract:Introduction: Litigation against the National Health Service (NHS) in England is rising, costing £2.4 billion in 2018/19. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of otolaryngology Clinical Negligence claims in England. Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of all Clinical Negligence claims in England held by NHS Resolution relating to otolaryngology between April 2013 and April 2018. Analysis was performed using information for cause, patient injury and claim cost. Where claim information was adequately detailed, the authors categorised claims by subspecialty, diagnosis and operation. Results: A total of 727 claims were identified with an estimated potential cost of £108 million. From these, 463 were closed claims. Including open claim reserves, the mean cost of a claim was £148,923. Head and neck surgery was the subspecialty with the highest number of claims (n=313, 43%) and highest cost (£51.5 million) followed by otology (n=171, £24.5 million) and rhinology (n=171, £13.6 million). Over half of claims were associated with an operation (n=429, 59%) where mastoid surgery (n=46) and endoscopic sinus surgery (n=46) were equally associated with the greatest number of claims. The most frequent reasons for litigation included failure or delay to diagnose (n=178, 25%) failure or delay to treat (n=136, 19%), intra-operative complications (n=130, 18%) and failure of the consent process (n=107, 15%). Discussion: Clinical Negligence claims in otolaryngology are related to several different components of patient management and is not limited to post-operative complications. This study highlights the importance of robust pathways in outpatient diagnostics and the consenting process, especially in the high-risk speciality of head and neck surgery, in order to deliver better patient care and reduce the impact of litigation.
-
can spinal surgery in england be saved from litigation a review of 978 Clinical Negligence claims against the nhs
European Spine Journal, 2018Co-Authors: John T Machin, Timothy W R Briggs, John Hardman, William Harrison, Mike HuttonAbstract:The aim of this study is to evaluate the true incidence of all Clinical Negligence claims against spinal surgery performed by orthopaedic spinal surgeons and neurosurgeons in the National Health Service (NHS) in England, including both open and closed claims. This study was a retrospective review of 978 Clinical Negligence claims held by NHS Resolution against spinal surgery cases identified from claims against ‘Neurosurgery’ and ‘Orthopaedic Surgery’. This category included all emergency, trauma and elective work and all open and closed cases without exclusion between April 2012 and April 2017. Clinical Negligence claims in spinal surgery were estimated to cost £535.5 million over this five-year period. There is a trend of both increasing volume and estimated costs of claims. The most common causes for claims were ‘judgement/timing’ (512 claims, 52.35%), ‘interpretation of results/Clinical picture’ (255 claims, 26.07%), ‘unsatisfactory outcome to surgery’ (192 claims, 19.63%), ‘fail to warn/informed consent’ (80 claims, 8.13%) and ‘never events’ including ‘wrong site surgery’ or ‘retained instrument post-operation’ (26 claims, 2.66%). A sub-analysis of 3 years including 574 claims revealed the most prevalent pathologies were iatrogenic nerve damage (132 claims, 23.00%), cauda equina syndrome (CES) (131 claims, 22.82%), inadequate decompression (91 claims, 15.85%), iatrogenic cord damage (72 claims, 12.54%), and infection (51 claims, 8.89%). The volume and costs of Clinical Negligence claims is threatening the future of spinal surgery. If spinal surgery is to continue to serve the patients who need it, most thorough investigation, implementation and sharing of lessons learned from litigation claims must be systematically carried out. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Timothy W R Briggs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what can be learned from litigation in otology a review of Clinical Negligence claims in england 2013 2018
Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 2021Co-Authors: F Mcclenaghan, Timothy W R Briggs, John T Machin, Andrew Marshall, Annakan Victor NavaratnamAbstract:Background Litigation in the National Health Service continues to rise with a 9.4 per cent increase in Clinical Negligence claims from the period 2018 and 2019 to the period 2019 and 2020. The cost of these claims now accounts for 1.8 per cent of the National Health Service 2019 to 2020 budget. This study aimed to identify the characteristics of Clinical Negligence claims in the subspecialty of otology. Methods This study was a retrospective review of all Clinical Negligence claims in otology in England held by National Health Service Resolution between April 2013 and April 2018. Results There were 171 claims in otology, 24 per cent of all otolaryngology claims, with a potential cost of £24.5 million. Over half of these were associated with hearing loss. Stapedectomy was the highest mean cost per claim operation at £769 438. The most common reasons for litigation were failure or delay in treatment (23 per cent), failure or delay in diagnosis (20 per cent), intra-operative complications (15 per cent) and inadequate consent (13 per cent). Conclusion There is a risk of high-cost claims in otology, especially with objective injuries such as hearing loss and facial nerve injury.
-
otorhinolaryngology litigation in england 727 Clinical Negligence cases against the national health service
Clinical Otolaryngology, 2021Co-Authors: Annakan Victor Navaratnam, Ahmad Hariri, John T Machin, Timothy W R Briggs, Andrew MarshallAbstract:INTRODUCTION Litigation against the National Health Service (NHS) in England is rising. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of otorhinolaryngology Clinical Negligence claims in England. METHODS A retrospective review was undertaken of all Clinical Negligence claims in England held by NHS Resolution relating to otorhinolaryngology between April 2013 and April 2018. Analysis was performed using information for cause, patient injury and claim cost. Where claim information was adequately detailed, the authors categorised claims by subspecialty, diagnosis and surgery. RESULTS A total number of 727 claims were identified with an estimated potential cost of £108 million. Out of these, 463 were closed claims. Including open claim reserves, the mean cost of a claim was £148 923. Head and neck surgery was the subspecialty with the highest number of claims (n = 313, 43%) and highest cost (£51.5 million) followed by otology (n = 171, £24.5 million) and rhinology (n = 171, £13.6 million). Over half of claims were associated with an operation (n = 429, 59%) where mastoid surgery (n = 46) and endoscopic sinus surgery (n = 46) were equally associated with the greatest number of claims. The most frequent causes for Clinical Negligence claims included failure or delay to diagnose (n = 178, 25%), failure or delay to treat (n = 136, 19%), intra-operative complications (n = 130, 18%) and failure of the consent process (n = 107, 15%). DISCUSSION Clinical Negligence claims in otorhinolaryngology are related to several different components of patient management and are not limited to postoperative complications. This study highlights the importance of robust pathways in out-patient diagnostics and the consenting process in order to deliver better patient care and reduce the impact of litigation. Keywords informed consent, malpractice, Clinical Negligence claims, litigation, otolaryngology.
-
otolaryngology litigation in england 727 Clinical Negligence cases against the nhs
Authorea Preprints, 2020Co-Authors: Annakan Victor Navaratnam, Ahmad Hariri, John T Machin, Andrew Marshall, Timothy W R BriggsAbstract:Introduction: Litigation against the National Health Service (NHS) in England is rising, costing £2.4 billion in 2018/19. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of otolaryngology Clinical Negligence claims in England. Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of all Clinical Negligence claims in England held by NHS Resolution relating to otolaryngology between April 2013 and April 2018. Analysis was performed using information for cause, patient injury and claim cost. Where claim information was adequately detailed, the authors categorised claims by subspecialty, diagnosis and operation. Results: A total of 727 claims were identified with an estimated potential cost of £108 million. From these, 463 were closed claims. Including open claim reserves, the mean cost of a claim was £148,923. Head and neck surgery was the subspecialty with the highest number of claims (n=313, 43%) and highest cost (£51.5 million) followed by otology (n=171, £24.5 million) and rhinology (n=171, £13.6 million). Over half of claims were associated with an operation (n=429, 59%) where mastoid surgery (n=46) and endoscopic sinus surgery (n=46) were equally associated with the greatest number of claims. The most frequent reasons for litigation included failure or delay to diagnose (n=178, 25%) failure or delay to treat (n=136, 19%), intra-operative complications (n=130, 18%) and failure of the consent process (n=107, 15%). Discussion: Clinical Negligence claims in otolaryngology are related to several different components of patient management and is not limited to post-operative complications. This study highlights the importance of robust pathways in outpatient diagnostics and the consenting process, especially in the high-risk speciality of head and neck surgery, in order to deliver better patient care and reduce the impact of litigation.
-
can spinal surgery in england be saved from litigation a review of 978 Clinical Negligence claims against the nhs
European Spine Journal, 2018Co-Authors: John T Machin, Timothy W R Briggs, John Hardman, William Harrison, Mike HuttonAbstract:The aim of this study is to evaluate the true incidence of all Clinical Negligence claims against spinal surgery performed by orthopaedic spinal surgeons and neurosurgeons in the National Health Service (NHS) in England, including both open and closed claims. This study was a retrospective review of 978 Clinical Negligence claims held by NHS Resolution against spinal surgery cases identified from claims against ‘Neurosurgery’ and ‘Orthopaedic Surgery’. This category included all emergency, trauma and elective work and all open and closed cases without exclusion between April 2012 and April 2017. Clinical Negligence claims in spinal surgery were estimated to cost £535.5 million over this five-year period. There is a trend of both increasing volume and estimated costs of claims. The most common causes for claims were ‘judgement/timing’ (512 claims, 52.35%), ‘interpretation of results/Clinical picture’ (255 claims, 26.07%), ‘unsatisfactory outcome to surgery’ (192 claims, 19.63%), ‘fail to warn/informed consent’ (80 claims, 8.13%) and ‘never events’ including ‘wrong site surgery’ or ‘retained instrument post-operation’ (26 claims, 2.66%). A sub-analysis of 3 years including 574 claims revealed the most prevalent pathologies were iatrogenic nerve damage (132 claims, 23.00%), cauda equina syndrome (CES) (131 claims, 22.82%), inadequate decompression (91 claims, 15.85%), iatrogenic cord damage (72 claims, 12.54%), and infection (51 claims, 8.89%). The volume and costs of Clinical Negligence claims is threatening the future of spinal surgery. If spinal surgery is to continue to serve the patients who need it, most thorough investigation, implementation and sharing of lessons learned from litigation claims must be systematically carried out. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Neil Rickman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
liability insurance and medical practice
Journal of Health Economics, 2007Co-Authors: Paul Fenn, Alastair Gray, Neil RickmanAbstract:We test for effects of tort liability on the use of certain diagnostic procedures, where the health care providers' expected cost of litigation is proxied by the risk-sharing arrangements agreed with their insurers. 2SLS and GMM estimators are adopted to test for possible endogeneity of these risk-sharing arrangements. Our findings are consistent with the exercise of liability-induced discretion by hospitals, especially regarding use of costly diagnostic imaging procedures. Hospitals facing higher expected costs per claim as a consequence of higher deductibles used these tests more frequently, after controlling for activity levels and casemix. These results are consistent with hospitals reacting to the incentives provided by a Clinical Negligence compensation system.
-
the economics of Clinical Negligence reform in england
Social Science Research Network, 2004Co-Authors: Paul Fenn, Alastair Gray, Neil RickmanAbstract:In Britain, the NHS spends millions of pounds a year compensating patients injured during medical treatment. Compensation is paid if the patient can demonstrate that treatment was supplied negligently. However, concern over the cost, effectiveness and administrative efficiency of this approach has led jurisdictions like Sweden, New Zealand and some US states to alter the basis for compensation, and the Department of Health has now published proposals for reform in England. We assess the current approach in England and provide costings for some key alternatives to have featured in the latest policy debate. We draw lessons for reform from international experience.
-
the economics of Clinical Negligence reform in england
The Economic Journal, 2004Co-Authors: Paul Fenn, Alastair Gray, Neil RickmanAbstract:In Britain, the NHS spends millions of pounds a year compensating patients injured during medical treatment. Compensation is paid if the patient can demonstrate that treatment was supplied negligently. However, concern over the cost, effectiveness and administrative efficiency of this approach has led jurisdictions like Sweden, New Zealand and some US states to alter the basis for compensation, and the Department of Health has now published proposals for reform in England. We assess the current approach in England and provide costings for some key alternatives to have featured in the latest policy debate. We draw lessons for reform from international experience. Sustaining an injury related to medical care can have serious economic and health consequences and such injuries are a growing concern in many countries due to a perception that the costs they give rise to are rapidly increasing. Public policy in this area can be regarded as having to address two key objectives: providing compensation to those who have suffered injuries and providing incentives to practitioners to supply an appropriate standard of care. However, different countries have adopted widely varying strategies in pursuit of these objectives, and in particular have adopted very different approaches to the question of liability for injury. In the UK, victims of medical injuries can claim compensation by filing a legal claim against the alleged perpetrator, such as a hospital or individual practitioner. In order to secure an award of damages, the claimant must prove that the defendant is at fault for the injuries cited, or, in the current UK terminology, that the tort of Clinical Negligence has occurred. This Negligence liability approach, however, is not found in all jurisdictions. For example, in Sweden, New Zealand and some American states, it is sufficient mainly to prove that the defendant caused the injuries in order to receive damages. Because it is not necessary to prove Negligence, these schemes are often termed ‘no-fault’ schemes, and are typically thought to have lower administrative costs due to the reduced burden of proof.1 These contrasting approaches to medical injury have many distributional and other consequences: for example, under Negligence liability, if injurers take efficient care the victims bear all losses, whereas under no-fault the injurers bear all losses irrespective of their care decision. However, research attention has focused on two particular areas of interest: first, assessing the respective cost and efficiency characteristics of Negligence liability and no-fault schemes and, second, seeing whether other composite models can be created; for instance, models in which some element of fault must be proven but in which the cost, delay and complexity involved in obtaining compensation are reduced by streamlining legal procedures and/or transferring liability from individual physicians to their employers. The UK's fault-based approach to compensation has received significant criticism for a number of years and has been accused of failing either to provide fair compensation or to create incentives for deterrence. Most recently, the National Audit Office (NAO, 2001), a major public inquiry (Kennedy, 2001) and the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC, 2002) have each proposed radical reform. The principal charges are that the system is costly to the NHS, imposes long delays on patients seeking redress, is administratively inefficient (in that the legal and administrative costs of cases regularly exceed the value of the damages at stake), and engenders a culture of secrecy and cover-up in which colleagues are unwilling to ‘blow the whistle’ on bad practice and is therefore inimical to improved standards of care. In support of these charges, it has been noted that in 2000/01 total NHS provisions for future settlements of Negligence claims stood at £4.4 bn; that the average time to resolution of the 23,000 cases outstanding at the end of March 2000 (excluding the longest, most complex, cases) was over five years; and that in 65% of settlements below £50,000, legal costs exceeded damages.2 Recognising these concerns, the Secretary of State for Health established an Advisory Group in 2001 to examine possible reforms, and in June 2003 a set of proposals was published for consultation (DoH, 2003). Whilst it rejects a general move to no-fault compensation, a stated aim of this consultation document is to ‘move the role of tort from its current central position to the outer perimeter of the NHS’ (Chapter 8, paragraph 10). In its place would be a ‘Redress Scheme’ containing a fast procedure for resolving ‘small claims’ (those with value below £30,000) – ultimately involving a relaxed standard of care – and a no-fault procedure for compensating birth-related neurological injuries (typically those injuries with the highest cost and complexity). Under these proposals, a person would retain the right to sue through the courts but (except for neurologically impaired babies) with a presumption that they had first applied to the NHS Redress Scheme. Those accepting packages of care (where possible to be provided by the NHS) and compensation under the scheme would be required to waive their right to go to court on the same case. It is clear that the Department of Health's proposals constitute potentially significant reforms to the way Clinical injuries are compensated by the NHS (and, given the sums involved, to resource allocation within the NHS). Yet the empirical basis for the debate to which they contribute has not been strong in the UK.3 The purpose of this paper is to present findings from new research aimed at casting fresh light on this debate. The research was commissioned to inform the deliberations of the Secretary of State for Health's Advisory Group; see Fenn et al. (2002). The paper is structured as follows. Section 1 reviews briefly the economic theory underlying the objectives of patient compensation schemes. In Section 2 we describe the institutional arrangements within which the English Clinical Negligence scheme operates,4 discuss its annual cash cost and assess its deterrence effects. Section 3 summarises what is known about the structure and performance of several overseas no-fault schemes in order to draw lessons for reform in England and identify data requirements for modelling such reform. In Section 4 we estimate, for the first time, the cost of possible reforms, paying particular attention to ‘small claims’ fault-based schemes of the type proposed in DoH (2003) and to a commonly cited model for no-fault compensation in England: the Swedish no-fault scheme. Section 5 concludes the paper.
-
Clinical Negligence in the uk throwing the baby out with the bath water
Economic Affairs, 2001Co-Authors: Neil Rickman, Paul FennAbstract:As the total cost of Clinical Negligence claims has grown in the UK in recent years, calls for reform have resurfaced. The government now plans a White Paper on the subject next year. This paper assesses some of the economic arguments surrounding such reform. It suggests that the principle of Negligence performs a useful economic function, that there is some uncertainty surrounding the precise costs of the UK's Clinical Negligence, and that costs of alternative systems may sometimes be larger than they first appear.
Abi Rimmer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Clinical Negligence doctors and managers must learn from litigation claims say experts
BMJ, 2021Co-Authors: Abi RimmerAbstract:Doctors and managers should learn from Clinical Negligence claims in the same way that they learn from Clinical incidents, experts have said. The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) programme and NHS Resolution have published a best practice guide for clinicians and managers about learning from litigation claims,1 which in 2019-20 are expected to cost the NHS £8.3bn (€9.6bn; $11.5bn). The guidance calls for Clinical Negligence claims to be discussed regularly in Clinical staff …
-
state gp indemnity scheme launches but questions remain over historical claims
BMJ, 2019Co-Authors: Abi RimmerAbstract:The government funded Clinical Negligence scheme for general practice has come into effect, but there are few details existing liabilities coverage. The scheme aims to provide more affordable indemnity cover for GPs in England. It will provide automatic, comprehensive cover for all GPs (including partners, salaried GPs, and locums, and those working out of hours) and practice staff (including nurses and allied health professionals) for Clinical Negligence claims relating to NHS work from 1 April 2019. The BMA has advised, however, that GPs will still need medical defence organisation cover for non-NHS activities, such as GMC or coroner’s court representation and private work.1 Simon Kayll, chief executive of the Medical Protection Society (MPS) said that GPs would also continue to need cover for regulatory matters and complaints …
-
government will cap legal costs of Clinical Negligence claims
BMJ, 2018Co-Authors: Abi RimmerAbstract:A group of government, NHS, and legal experts will work to introduce a cap on the amount that lawyers can recover in Clinical Negligence cases, the Department of Health and Social Care has announced. The proposed cap would apply to all cases up to £25 000 and could save the NHS £45m a year, it said. There is currently no limit on legal costs that can be recouped from Clinical Negligence claims. The department said that claims, including legal bills, had …
-
cap on legal fees for Clinical Negligence work does not go far enough defence organisations warn
BMJ, 2017Co-Authors: Abi RimmerAbstract:Proposals to limit the amount lawyers can claim in costs on medical Negligence cases worth less than £25 000 (€28 000; $33 000) do not go far enough, medical defence organisations have said. In a review of civil litigation costs,1 Lord Justice Jackson has recommended that the Department of Health and the Civil Justice Council should set up a working party to develop a process for handling Clinical Negligence claims of under £25 000. He said that the process should have a grid of fixed recoverable costs …
-
Clinical Negligence claims could rise substantially warns mps
BMJ, 2017Co-Authors: Abi RimmerAbstract:The cost of Clinical Negligence claims could rise to £2.6bn a year by 2022 in England if spending continues to increase at its current rate, the Medical Protection Society has warned. In a report published on Friday 23 June the MPS called for legal reforms to control the cost of Clinical Negligence claims.1 It said that the amount paid out in claims by NHS Resolution, the organisation that provides indemnity schemes for NHS organisations in England, had risen by 72% in five years. If this trajectory continued for the next five years, the yearly bill to the NHS could increase from £1.5bn to £2.6bn, the MPS said. Recent changes to the personal injury discount rate—the percentage rate that successful claimants in personal …