Malpractice Mediation Lacks Physician Participation
“Change will require medical leaders, hospital administrators, and malpractice insurers to temper their suspicion of the tort system sufficiently to approach medical errors and adverse events as learning opportunities, and to retain lawyers who embrace mediation as an opportunity to solve problems, show compassion, and improve care,” according to the study published in the Journal of Health, Politics, Policy and Law.
Researchers looked at 31 cases from 11 nonprofit hospitals in New York City in 2006 and 2007 that went to mediation. About 70 percent of the cases settled either during or after mediation, for amounts from $35,000 to $1.7 million.
The case for mediation would appear to be compelling in medical malpractice cases because:
- The outcome is under the parties’ control.
- Plaintiffs can receive payment soon after the harm instead of waiting years.
- Defendants do not have to pay outside lawyers to try the case.
- Members of the medical staff do not have to prepare for discovery and a trial.
- Even if mediation doesn’t resolve the case, it may create enough momentum to lead to a settlement.
- As Medicare Advantage Cuts Loom, Disagreement Over Program's Stability
- Medicare Advantage Carriers See 'No Choice' But to Accept Cuts
- Centralizing the Revenue Cycle Protects the Bottom Line
- Physicians to Appeal 'Docs v. Glocks' Ruling in FL
- CA Fines 8 Hospitals for Medical Errors
- Doctors Feel Pressure to Accept Risk-based Reimbursement
- 3 Management Lessons from a Supermarket Debacle
- Surgical Checklists Unused in 10% of Hospitals, CMS Data Shows
- Employers Weigh Risks, Benefits of Private Exchanges
- Revenue Cycles Get a Boost from Simple JPEG Files