Original ArticleNeurosurgical Defensive Medicine in Texas and Illinois: A Tale of 2 States
Introduction
The threat of medical liability can promote the practice of defensive medicine.1 In the United States, defensive medicine has been shown to increase health care costs and to expose patients to unnecessary tests and associated morbidity. It has been estimated that the total cost of the medical liability environment in the United States was $55.6 billion in 2008, approximately 2.4% of national health care spending.2 The practice of defensive medicine, which has been proposed as a driver of these costs, is generally divided into 2 categories: positive behaviors and negative behaviors. Positive defensive medicine is the practice of providing care that is unnecessary or repetitive, whereas negative defensive medicine is refusing to provide a type of care for a patient because of either perceived or actual medicolegal risk.3
Physicians in high-risk specialties such as neurosurgery have been shown to engage in defensive medicine practices.1, 4, 5, 6 Previous surveys of physicians in specialties with a high risk of litigation (emergency medicine, general surgery, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, obstetrics/gynecology, and radiology) found that 93% of physicians reported practicing defensive medicine.4 When asked to report their most defensive act, 43% of physicians reported ordering imaging in situations where it was not clinically indicated.4 In addition, 42% of physicians reported taking active steps to restrict their practice to avoid procedures prone to complications and avoiding patients with complex medical problems.4 A study on the prevalence of defensive medicine in orthopedic trauma surgeons found that an average of 22% of all ordered tests were for defensive medicine purposes and estimated this cost to be approximately $256.3 million annually.7
These studies highlight the climate that is generated around the fear of medical litigation.8, 9, 10 In an environment with widespread positive defensive medicine practices, patients are exposed to unnecessary medical procedures as well as their associated morbidities and risks and increases in health care costs.11, 12, 13 Negative defensive medicine practices impede the ability of high-risk patients to receive appropriate care in poor medicolegal environments because of fear of litigation.14, 15 Much effort has been put into determining predictors and motivators of defensive medical practices, with the end goal of eliminating incentives for physicians to practice defensively to reduce wasteful spending and protect high-risk patients.16, 17 In this study, we compare the self-reported liability characteristics and defensive medicine behaviors among neurosurgeons in 2 states: Illinois, a state with a generally poor medicolegal environment and no active cap on malpractice damages, and Texas, a state with a favorable medicolegal environment and limitations on damages for pain and suffering in malpractice lawsuits.18, 19
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
A 51-question online survey was sent by e-mail to 3344 board-certified members of the American Board of Neurological Surgery, using e-mail addresses listed in public records. The survey was designed to measure the perception of liability risk and defensive medicine practices among neurosurgeons in the United States, was open to responders for 60 days, and was completely anonymous. The 51 questions were contained in 8 domains: surgeon demographics, patient population demographics, physician
Results
Of 146 neurosurgeons surveyed in Illinois, 86 (58.9%) responded to the survey. In Texas, 65 of 265 (24.5%) neurosurgeons surveyed responded. Respondents were not required to answer every question. Most survey respondents from both states were men (140; 93.3%). Surgeons in Texas had a higher annual case volume compared with surgeons in Illinois (277 cases per year vs. 225 cases per year by frequency-based average, P = 0.003) but were otherwise well matched across self-reported experience and
Discussion
Addressing the overall medicolegal environment could be key to reducing defensive practices. If physicians are less likely to experience litigation, they may be less inclined to order unnecessary imaging, blood work, or referrals, and they may be more willing to take on patients deemed to be high risk.1, 6, 20, 21 To explore the association between perception of medicolegal environment and defensive practice further, we compared the self-reported defensive practices of neurosurgeons in 2 states
Conclusions
Neurosurgeons in Illinois, a state with high annual malpractice premiums and no active cap on malpractice settlements, are more likely to believe that there is an ongoing medical liability crisis and more likely to practice positive defensive medicine than neurosurgeons in Texas, a state with lower annual malpractice premiums and restrictions on damages for pain and suffering.
References (30)
- et al.
Effects of the medical liability system in Australia, the UK, and the USA
Lancet
(2006) - et al.
The prevalence and impact of defensive medicine in the radiographic workup of the trauma patient: a pilot study
Am J Surg
(2015) - et al.
Effect of physician strategies for coping with the US medical malpractise crisis on healthcare delivery and patient access to healthcare
Public Health
(2008) Medical malpractice reform measures and their effects
Chest
(2013)- et al.
Medical professional liability and health care system reform
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2010) - et al.
Defensive medicine in neurosurgery: does state-level liability risk matter?
Neurosurgery
(2015) - et al.
National costs of the medical liability system
Health Aff
(2010) - et al.
Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment
JAMA
(2005) - et al.
Malpractice risk according to physician specialty
N Engl J Med
(2011) - et al.
Malpractice liability and defensive medicine: a national survey of neurosurgeons
PLoS One
(2012)
The prevalence and costs of defensive medicine among orthopaedic trauma surgeons: a national survey study
J Orthop Trauma
Emergency physician perceptions of medically unnecessary advanced diagnostic imaging
Acad Emerg Med
Tort reform. While some states have taken action to cap damages, fear of litigation still drives defensive medicine
Med Econ
Attitudes about medical malpractice: an american society of Neuroradiology survey
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Incidence and costs of defensive medicine among orthopedic surgeons in the United States: a national survey study
Am J Orthop
Cited by (15)
Physicians’ views and experiences of defensive medicine: An international review of empirical research
2021, Health PolicyCitation Excerpt :The next largest proportion of papers reported on defensive practice in surgery: 16 papers (20.3 %) reported exclusively on surgeons; a further 15 of the mixed sample studies included general or specialist surgeons. Neurosurgery was the most investigated surgical specialty field: nine papers investigated only neurosurgeons [11,43–49] and three of the mixed sample papers included neurosurgeons [25,27,50]. Eleven papers reported on general surgery or surgery without identifying a specialty area.
Defensive medicine: Everything and its opposite
2020, European Journal of Internal MedicineDefensive Medicine: A Tax/Surcharge for the Delivery of Healthcare
2016, World NeurosurgeryA Tale of 2 States—A Texas Neurosurgeon's Perspective
2016, World NeurosurgeryOperant Conditioning and the Practice of Defensive Medicine
2016, World Neurosurgery
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that the article content was composed in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.