Defensive medicine documented

by rcentor on November 18, 2008

 

via KevinMD and White Coat Notes – MMS First-of-its-kind Survey of Physicians Shows Extent and Cost of the Practice of Defensive Medicine and its Multiple Effects of Health Care on the State

“This survey clearly shows that the fear of medical liability is a serious burden on health care,” said Dr. Sethi. “The fear of being sued is driving physicians to defensive medicine and dramatically increasing health care costs. This poses a critical issue, as soaring costs are the biggest threat to the success of Massachusetts health reform efforts.”

7 tests and procedures Physicians were asked about their use of seven tests and procedures: plain film X-rays, CT Scans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRIs), ultrasounds, laboratory testing, specialty referrals and consultations, and hospital admissions. The results were self-reported by the physicians responding to the survey.

The results showed that 83 percent of the physicians surveyed reported practicing defensive medicine and that an average of 18 to 28 percent of tests, procedures, referrals and consultations and 13 percent of hospitalizations were ordered for defensive reasons.

Cost is in Billions Sethi and Aseltine estimated the costs of the tests to be $281 million for the eight specialties surveyed, based on Medicare reimbursements rates in Massachusetts for 2005-2006. In addition, the cost of unnecessary hospital admissions was estimated to be $1.1 billion, for a combined total estimate of nearly $1.4 billion. The authors said the dollar estimates do not include tests and diagnostic procedures ordered by physicians in other specialties, observation admissions to hospitals, specialty referrals and consultations, or unnecessary prescriptions. The eight specialties represented in the survey account for only 46 percent of the physicians in the state.

Now I break for a public service announcement.  Check this rant for outrage from malpractice lawyers.

Malpractice reform can slowly change this problem.  We, physicians, would have to change our mindset about test ordering.  Fear of malpractice has a costly negative effect on health care.  We could practice better medicine if we had a healthier legal climate.

As long time readers of this blog know, I favor special health courts which protect patients and physicians. 

As we prepare to attack health care reform, I hope that the administration will include malpractice reform.  Malpractice reform is the single best way to decrease health care costs without decreasing necessary services.  In fact, malpractice reform will improve health care access.

 

viagra
free viagra
buy viagra online
generic viagra
how does viagra work
cheap viagra
buy viagra
buy viagra online inurl
viagra 6 free samples
viagra online
viagra for women
viagra side effects
female viagra
natural viagra
online viagra
cheapest viagra prices
herbal viagra
alternative to viagra
buy generic viagra
purchase viagra online
free viagra without prescription
viagra attorneys
free viagra samples before buying
buy generic viagra cheap
viagra uk
generic viagra online
try viagra for free
generic viagra from india
fda approves viagra
free viagra sample
what is better viagra or levitra
discount generic viagra online
viagra cialis levitra
viagra dosage
viagra cheap
viagra on line
best price for viagra
free sample pack of viagra
viagra generic
viagra without prescription
discount viagra
gay viagra
mail order viagra
viagra inurl
generic viagra online paypal
generic viagra overnight
generic viagra online pharmacy
generic viagra uk
buy cheap viagra online uk
suppliers of viagra
how long does viagra last
viagra sex
generic viagra soft tabs
generic viagra 100mg
buy viagra onli
generic viagra online without prescription
viagra energy drink
cheapest uk supplier viagra
viagra cialis
generic viagra safe
viagra professional
viagra sales
viagra free trial pack
viagra lawyers
over the counter viagra
best price for generic viagra
viagra jokes
buying viagra
viagra samples
viagra sample
cialis
generic cialis
cheapest cialis
buy cialis online
buying generic cialis
cialis for order
what are the side effects of cialis
buy generic cialis
what is the generic name for cialis
cheap cialis
cialis online
buy cialis
cialis side effects
how long does cialis last
cialis forum
cialis lawyer ohio
cialis attorneys
cialis attorney columbus
cialis injury lawyer ohio
cialis injury attorney ohio
cialis injury lawyer columbus
prices cialis
cialis lawyers
viagra cialis levitra
cialis lawyer columbus
online generic cialis
daily cialis
cialis injury attorney columbus
cialis attorney ohio
cialis cost
cialis professional
cialis super active
how does cialis work
what does cialis look like
cialis drug
viagra cialis
cialis to buy new zealand
cialis without prescription
free cialis
cialis soft tabs
discount cialis
cialis generic
generic cialis from india
cheap cialis sale online
cialis daily
cialis reviews
cialis generico
how can i take cialis
cheap cialis si
cialis vs viagra
levitra
generic levitra
levitra attorneys
what is better viagra or levitra
viagra cialis levitra
levitra side effects
buy levitra
levitra online
levitra dangers
how does levitra work
levitra lawyers
what is the difference between levitra and viagra
levitra versus viagra
which works better viagra or levitra
buy levitra and overnight shipping
levitra vs viagra
canidan pharmacies levitra
how long does levitra last
viagra cialis levitra
levitra acheter
comprare levitra
levitra ohne rezept
levitra 20mg
levitra senza ricetta
cheapest generic levitra
levitra compra
cheap levitra
levitra overnight
levitra generika
levitra kaufen

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Aaron November 18, 2008 at 1:04 pm

You do realize that you’re describing lousy survey methodology, don’t you? (Even if we assume that this wasn’t conducted by voluntary response to a mass mailing, as was almost certainly the case.) Or doesn’t it matter, if the outcome is what you (and the sponsors of the survey) desire?

What you should be looking for is an audit of medical care provided over a specific period of time, based a statistically significant, randomly selected set of patient files and billing records. Granted, patient privacy rights and laws complicate this, but it should nonetheless be possible for a major health care provider (BC/BS, Medicare/Medicaid, Kaiser Permanente, Wellpoint….) to do a pretty good job with their own records. It seems like work right up the alley of Thompson Reuters Healthcare Analysis, if anybody cares enough to set aside their agenda and to fund a meaningful study.

The result of a competent study might be the same, or it might even be worse, but it would be much more likely to be accurate. The best part, though, is that it would be credible.

Frank57 November 20, 2008 at 10:00 am

The first response of cynics is to attack the messenger.
The second response is to attack the methodology of the study, which the author “Aaron” clearly hasn’t bothered to read. Otherwise, he wouldn’t speculate on its methods. (BTW, the authors of the study clearly and forthrightly acknowledge its limitations.)
The type of audit Aaron suggests might be interesting, but not particularly helpful. More and more studies won’t solve the problem, unless the ultimate goal is to delay the inevitable, which is the demise of the malpractice litigation system.
More helpful: Just fix the damn system. The only people for whom it reliably works are malpractice lawyers. Even injured patients don’t get their due from it.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: