Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Updates in medical professional liability: a primer for electrophysiologists

  • REVIEW
  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Medical professional liability (MPL), traditionally known as medical malpractice, affects most electrophysiologists some point during their career, either directly through personal experience or indirectly by the experiences of colleagues. Despite this, most physicians struggle to accurately describe MPL in the context of clinical practice. Providers know little about the outcomes of malpractice claims as reporting of settled or litigated MPL cases is sparse in the medical literature. In the USA, individual patients can file a malpractice claim in a tort-based system, whereas in other parts of the world, no-fault malpractice systems are increasingly prevalent. Tort reform remains a topic of much debate as the economic costs of malpractice contribute to the ever-expanding costs of health care in the USA. This review provides a framework to define MPL, describes the tort and no-fault systems of malpractice, and details the economic impacts of MPL on health care and the practice of cardiology in the USA. Current policy trends towards MPL including tort reform are reviewed, and MPL as it relates to the practice of cardiac electrophysiology is detailed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thirumalaikolundusubramanian P, Meenakshisundaram R, Senthilkumaran S. Ethics, legality, and education in the practice of cardiology. In: Heart and toxins. New York: Elsevier; 2015. p. 595–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-416595-3.00023-2.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher M, Schneider P. Stroke and the law: principles and practice. Stroke. 2014;45:3141–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.002864.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sanbar S, Warner J. Medical malpractice overview. In: Sanbar S, Firestone M, Fiscina S, LeBlang T, Wecht C, Zaremski M, editors. Legal medicine. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 253–64.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Moffett P, Moore G. The standard of care: legal history and definitions: the bad and good news. West J Emerg Med. 2011;12(1):109–12 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21691483. Accessed 5 Aug 2018.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Howard M. Physician-patient relationship. In: Sanbar S, Firestone M, Fiscinac S, LeBlang T, Wecht C, Zaremski M, editors. Legal medicine. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 315–24.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Oetgen WJ, Parikh PD, Cacchione JG, et al. Characteristics of medical professional liability claims in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105(5):745–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AMJCARD.2009.10.072.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bank W. Medical malpractice systems around the globe: examples from the US- tort liability system and the Sweden- no fault system (English). Washington, DC. 2003;World Bank:1–37. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2003/03/5132347/medical-malpractice-systems-around-globe-examples-us%2D%2Dtort-liability-system-sweden%2D%2Dno-fault-system.

  8. Kessler DP. Evaluating the medical malpractice system and options for reform. J Econ Perspect. 2011;25(2):93–110 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21595327. Accessed 6 Aug 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gaine WJ. No-fault compensation systems. BMJ. 2003;326(7397):997–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7397.997.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Cooper JK. Sweden’s no-fault patient-injury insurance. N Engl J Med. 1976;294(23):1268–70. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197606032942305.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mello MM, Chandra A, Gawande AA, Studdert DM. National costs of the medical liability system. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(9):1569–77. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Seabury S, Chandra A, Lakdawalla D, Jena AB. Defense costs of medical malpractice claims. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(14):1354–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1114805.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schaffer AC, Jena AB, Seabury SA, Singh H, Chalasani V, Kachalia A. Rates and characteristics of paid malpractice claims among US physicians by specialty, 1992–2014. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(5):710–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0311.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Studdert DM, Mello MM, Gawande AA, Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Yoon C, et al. Claims, errors, and compensation payments in medical malpractice litigation. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(19):2024–33. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa054479.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jena AB, Seabury S, Lakdawalla D, Chandra A. Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(7):629–36. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1012370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Mangalmurti S, Seabury SA, Chandra A, Lakdawalla D, Oetgen WJ, Jena AB. Medical professional liability risk among US cardiologists. Am Heart J. 2014;167(5):690–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2014.02.007.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Clinton HR, Obama B. Making patient safety the centerpiece of medical liability reform. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(21):2205–8. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp068100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. S. 1784 — 109th Congress: National MEDiC Act. www.GovTrack.us. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s1784. Published 2005. Accessed 3 Apr 2018.

  19. Dove JT, Brush JE, Chazal RA, Oetgen WJ. Medical professional liability and health care system reform. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(25):2801–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JACC.2010.03.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilson H, Wilson JS, Ryan F. Tort reform and the cardiologist. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(2):290–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.054.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sattia N, Hodge S. Physician apologies. Pract Lawyer. 2011;Fall:35–43.

  22. Saitta N, Hodge SD. Efficacy of a physician’s words of empathy: an overview of state apology laws. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2012;112(5):302–6. https://doi.org/10.7556/jaoa.2012.112.5.302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sattia N, Hodge S. Is it unrealistic to expect a doctor to apologize for an unforeseen medical complication?—a primer on apologies laws. Pennsylvania Bar Assoc Q. 2011;July:93–110.

  24. Stewart RM, Love JD, Rocheleau LA, Sirinek KR. Tort reform is associated with more medical board complaints and disciplinary actions. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(4):567–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAMCOLLSURG.2011.12.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McMichael BJ, Van Horn RL, Viscusi WK. Sorry is never enough: the effect of state apology laws on medical malpractice liability risk. SSRN eLibrary. (forthcoming 2018). doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

  26. Mangalmurti S. Avoiding lawsuits: understanding cardiology malpractice claims. CardioSource WorldNews. https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/articles/2015/06/08/09/39/avoiding-lawsuits-understanding-cardiology-malpractice-claims. Published 2015.

  27. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, Kim YH, Saad EB, Aguinaga L, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation. Hear Rhythm. 2017;14(10):e275–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.05.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen SA, Davies W, Iesaka Y, Kalman J, et al. Worldwide survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety of catheter ablation for human atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2005;111(9):1100–5. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000157153.30978.67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sobolev M, Shiloh AL, Di Biase L, Slovut DP. Ultrasound-guided cannulation of the femoral vein in electrophysiological procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. 2017;19(5):850–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tanaka-Esposito CC, Tchou P. Ultrasound guided vascular access in the electrophysiology lab: should it be a standard of care? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2017;49(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-017-0240-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen SA, Davies W, Iesaka Y, Kalman J, et al. Updated worldwide survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety of catheter ablation for human atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3(1):32–8. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.109.859116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Slotwiner D, Varma N, Akar JG, et al. HRS expert consensus statement on remote interrogation and monitoring for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Hear Rhythm. 2015;12(7):e69–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vinck I, De Laet C, Stroobandt S, Van Brabandt H. Legal and organizational aspects of remote cardiac monitoring: the example of implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Europace. 2012;14(9):1230–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eus004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32607, USA

    Christopher Austin

  2. Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Fred Kusumoto

Authors
  1. Christopher Austin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fred Kusumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher Austin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Austin, C., Kusumoto, F. Updates in medical professional liability: a primer for electrophysiologists. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 56, 151–158 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-018-0453-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-018-0453-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation