The Experts below are selected from a list of 12387 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Neera Bhatia - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Australian Medical Liability 2nd edition [Book Review]
Deakin Law Review, 2014Co-Authors: Neera BhatiaAbstract:Review(s) of: Australian Medical Liability 2nd edition, by Bill Madden and Janine Mcilwraith, LexisNexis Butterworths, 2013, ISBN: 9780409333282 (pbk), ISBN: 9780409333299 (ebk).
Michelle M. Mello - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Medical Liability Climate and Prospects for Reform
JAMA, 2014Co-Authors: Michelle M. Mello, David M. Studdert, Allen KachaliaAbstract:For many physicians, the prospect of being sued for Medical malpractice is a singularly disturbing aspect of modern clinical practice. State legislatures have enacted tort reforms, such as caps on damages, in an effort to reduce the volume and costs of malpractice litigation. Attempts to introduce similar traditional reform measures at the federal level have so far failed. Much less prominent, but potentially more important, are proposed alternative approaches for resolving Medical injuries; a number of these efforts are currently being tested in federally sponsored demonstration projects. These nontraditional reforms have considerable promise for addressing some of the system’s most challenging issues, including high costs and barriers to accessing compensation. In this Special Communication, we review recent national trends in Medical Liability claims and costs, which indicate a sharp reduction in the rate of paid claims and flat or declining levels in compensation payments and Liability insurance costs over the last 7 to 10 years. We discuss a number of nontraditional reform approaches—communication-and-resolution programs, presuit notification and apology laws, safe harbor legislation, judge-directed negotiation, and administrative compensation systems—and we conclude by describing several forces likely to shape change in the Medical Liability environment over the next decade.
-
New Directions in Medical Liability Reform
The New England journal of medicine, 2011Co-Authors: Allen Kachalia, Michelle M. MelloAbstract:Traditional strategies for Medical Liability reform have had limited success in controlling malpractice costs and have not improved health care quality. Future directions will be informed by evaluations of approaches aimed at reducing Liability costs and improving safety.
-
national costs of the Medical Liability system
2010Co-Authors: Michelle M. Mello, Amitabh Chandra, Atul A. Gawande, David M. StuddertAbstract:This paper estimates the national costs of the Medical Liability system, including indemnity payments, administrative costs, defensive medicine costs, and lost clinician work time, synthesizing data from a variety of sources. Total costs are estimated at $55.6 billion in 2008, including $45.6 billion in defensive medicine costs, $5.7 billion in indemnity payments, and over $4 billion in administrative and other expenses. The quality of the evidence underlying the estimates is discussed. We conclude that although the Liability system is costly in absolute terms, because it accounts for only a small proportion (2.4%) of total health care spending, Medical Liability expenditures cannot be the main, or even one of the most important, drivers of rising health care costs.
-
National Costs Of The Medical Liability System
Health affairs (Project Hope), 2010Co-Authors: Michelle M. Mello, Amitabh Chandra, Atul A. Gawande, David M. StuddertAbstract:Concerns about reducing the rate of growth of health expenditures have reignited interest in Medical Liability reforms and their potential to save money by reducing the practice of defensive medicine. It is not easy to estimate the costs of the Medical Liability system, however. This article identifies the various components of Liability system costs, generates national estimates for each component, and discusses the level of evidence available to support the estimates. Overall annual Medical Liability system costs, including defensive medicine, are estimated to be $55.6 billion in 2008 dollars, or 2.4 percent of total health care spending.
-
The role of Medical Liability reform in federal health care reform.
The New England journal of medicine, 2009Co-Authors: Michelle M. Mello, Troyen A. BrennanAbstract:Should the health care reform package include reforms to the Medical Liability system, which is often blamed for contributing to rising health care costs? Michelle Mello and Dr. Troyen Brennan discuss the pros and cons.
Barack Obama - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Making Patient Safety the Centerpiece of Medical Liability Reform
The New England journal of medicine, 2006Co-Authors: Hillary Clinton, Barack ObamaAbstract:To overcome the impasse in the debate on Medical Liability, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have introduced legislation, the National Medical Error Disclosure and Compensation (MEDiC) Bill, to direct reform toward the improvement of patient safety. The Senators write that the MEDiC Bill provides a commonsense solution that avoids the political pitfalls that have hampered other efforts to reform the Medical Liability system.
Ernest H. Moyer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Search for the Elusive Electronic Medical Record System—Medical Liability, the Missing Factor
Journal of Medical Systems, 1997Co-Authors: Ralph R. Grams, Ernest H. MoyerAbstract:Over the past few years, the traditional paper-based Medical record system has come under close scrutiny by every participant in the healthcare industry. Some groups, especially federal agencies such as Medicare and Medicaid, HMOs, and other third party payors, have begun to demand changes in Medical record documentation, and have become very assertive as to what goals and objectives will be met. In contrast, the Medical Liability insurance industry has remained almost invisible during this period of transition. At a recent electronic Medical records (EMR) conference participants attending a software development workshop were asked if they had their systems reviewed from a medicolegal standpoint by a malpractice insurance carrier. In response to this inquiry, not one software vendor raised their hand to indicate this had been accomplished, or was even contemplated. In the author's opinion, the key missing factor in the current quest for a paperless Medical office system rests in the domain of those who represent the Medical Liability industry. All of these gate-keepers of Medical loss and risk prevention will eventually be called upon, either by choice or necessity, to validate every working EMR system that is used in Medical practices in the future. This article will explore the best information published from this currently silent sector of the industry, and proposes an active involvement by the Medical Liability industry in the current EMR design and development processes taking place. In addition, there are 10 minimum EMR design criteria contained in this article that are recommended for implementation based upon 16 years of Medical malpractice experience and loss prevention input.
-
The Search for the Elusive Electronic Medical Record System—Medical Liability, the Missing Factor
Journal of Medical Systems, 1997Co-Authors: Ralph R. Grams, Ernest H. MoyerAbstract:Over the past few years, the traditional paper-based Medical record system has come under close scrutiny by every participant in the healthcare industry. Some groups, especially federal agencies such as Medicare and Medicaid, HMOs, and other third party payors, have begun to demand changes in Medical record documentation, and have become very assertive as to what goals and objectives will be met. In contrast, the Medical Liability insurance industry has remained almost invisible during this period of transition. At a recent electronic Medical records (EMR) conference participants attending a software development workshop were asked if they had their systems reviewed from a medicolegal standpoint by a malpractice insurance carrier. In response to this inquiry, not one software vendor raised their hand to indicate this had been accomplished, or was even contemplated. In the author's opinion, the key missing factor in the current quest for a paperless Medical office system rests in the domain of those who represent the Medical Liability industry. All of these gate-keepers of Medical loss and risk prevention will eventually be called upon, either by choice or necessity, to validate every working EMR system that is used in Medical practices in the future. This article will explore the best information published from this currently silent sector of the industry, and proposes an active involvement by the Medical Liability industry in the current EMR design and development processes taking place. In addition, there are 10 minimum EMR design criteria contained in this article that are recommended for implementation based upon 16 years of Medical malpractice experience and loss prevention input.
Jimmy D Bell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
progress at the intersection of patient safety and Medical Liability insights from the ahrq patient safety and Medical Liability demonstration program
Health Services Research, 2016Co-Authors: Susan M Ridgely, Michael D Greenberg, Michelle B Pillen, Jimmy D BellAbstract:Objective To identify lessons learned from the experience of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety and Medical Liability (PSML) Demonstration Program. Data Sources/Study Setting On September 9, 2009, President Obama directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to authorize demonstration projects that put “patient safety first” with the intent of reducing preventable adverse outcomes and stemming Liability costs. Seven demonstration projects received 3 years of funding from AHRQ in the summer of 2010, and the program formally came to a close in June 2015. Study Design The seven grantees implemented complex, broad-ranging innovations addressing both patient safety and Medical Liability in “real-world” contexts. Some projects featured novel approaches, while others implemented adaptations of existing models. Each project was funded by AHRQ to collect data on the impact of its interventions. In addition, AHRQ funded a cross-cutting qualitative evaluation focused on lessons learned in implementing PSML interventions. Data Collection/Extraction Methods Site visits and follow-up interviews supplemented with material abstracted from formal project reports to AHRQ. Principal Findings The PSML demonstration projects focused on three broad approaches: (1) improving communication around adverse events through disclosure and resolution programs; (2) preventing harm through implementation of clinical “best practices”; and (3) exploring alternative methods of settling claims. Although the demonstration contributed to accumulating evidence that these kinds of interventions can positively affect outcomes, there is also evidence to suggest that these interventions can be difficult to scale. Conclusions In addition to producing at least preliminary positive outcomes, the demonstration also lends credence to the idea that targeted interventions that improve some aspect of patient safety or malpractice performance may also contribute more broadly to institutional culture and the alignment of all parties around reducing risk and preventing harm. However, more empirical work needs to be carried out to quantify the effect of such interventions.