Forums » Open clinical » General clinical » Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
|
Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 19/10/2012 1:39 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 958
First: 15/7/2011 Last: 15/5/2013 |
Defensive medicine is seeping into Doctors’ training, according to a survey published earlier this year. Most students and residents at one medical school state they witness the practice in clinical training. They are taught to factor medical liability into patient-care decisions. Practicing defensive medicine to avoid medical liability lawsuits may not be a formal part of medical school curriculum, but it's still being taught to medical students and residents. A survey of 202 fourth-year medical students and third-year residents at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago found that 94% of students and 96% of residents have seen examples of defensive medicine in practice. Nearly two-thirds of students and three-quarters of residents said their attending physician implied that they take medical liability concerns into consideration when making clinical decisions. Nearly half of respondents said their seniors directly instructed them to do so, says the study in the Academic Medicine Journal (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22189882/). |
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 19/10/2012 2:14 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 19/10/2012 3:50 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 20/10/2012 10:34 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 20/10/2012 1:34 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 3037
First: 27/3/2012 Last: 18/5/2013 |
I do agree respected Kirked that good medicine is good law and provided we undertake our duties in accordance with accepted standards and keep medical notes of a high standard, we are unlikely to have major problems. Doctors practice defensive medicine out of fear of being sued, and patients are paying the price with their life, in some cases. Defensive medicine has become the standard of care, thanks to trial lawyers who have blurred the lines between malpractice and “mal-occurrence,” and the effects are not only costly in terms of money, they may also be costing patients their lives. I feel sorry that nowadays, defensive medicine is the practice of diagnostic or therapeutic measures conducted primarily not to ensure the health of the patient, but as a safeguard against possible malpractice liability. This could be better avoided by our genuine & non commercial clinical practice. |
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 20/10/2012 3:22 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 20/10/2012 4:15 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 21/10/2012 12:05 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 21/10/2012 10:02 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 958
First: 15/7/2011 Last: 15/5/2013 |
In Response to Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training: But even the most defensive, or should I say defensible, cases can end with the plaintiff profiting. I broke a patients tooth, trying to intubate them. I knew their single upper incisor was held on by a thread of dentine, and that the gold crown alongside was glued to that; I had told the patient about the risk and noted that their shape and size (124kgs, 5ft 9ins, BMI 42) would make them a difficult intubation. Sure enough, it snapped. I got immediate, under anaesthesia, assistance from the Dental dept. to repair it but to no avail. I spoke to and apologised to the patient 12 and 24hours later. "No prob's, Doc! I knew it was on its last legs." Twelve months later, solicitor's letter, claiming £14,000 in damages, but if settled immediately, they would be satisfied with £9,000. NINE THOUSAND POUNDS! For a tooth! The Trust solicitors told me that the first sum was intended to frighten, and the second to be less than the court costs and the other side's legal expences, to encourage settlement. Although both I and my Defence Union pointed out to the Trust that there was excellent evidence in our favour, I think - they never told me - that the Trust settled out of court, becasue it was cheaper. Never mind my reputation, or that Mrs.Jones would have wait another month for her hip replacement, as the Trust had spent the money. Now that has to be blackmail, extortion, demand with menaces, not a legal process to achieve reasonable reimbursement of a plaintiff's lot. But apparently not. John Posted by John D John I sympathise with the situation you had. Trusts all too frequently will make a payment of several thousand pounds to the claimant simply to make him go away. Its purpose is damage limitation - pay out a sum of money rather than have the case tried in court which will be time consuming and expensive. The offensive aspect of such a course of action is that the Doctors reputation counts for nothing. He may have acted perfectly professionally but the trust really doesn't care about that. I am curious in the example you gave if your defence organisation was involved. The major defence organisations should be giving you legal support to protect your actions and your good name - if they don't do that then why are Doctors paying them thousands of pounds each year for that purpose?. |
|
Re: Defensive medicine seeping into physician training
posted at 21/10/2012 10:27 AM BST
on bmj.com
|






