Substandard anesthetic care resulted in financial recovery in >80% of malpractice claims, while appropriate care still resulted in payment in >40% of claims.
Observational (n=1,004)
Does the standard of anesthesia care impact the likelihood of financial recovery in malpractice claims?
Even when appropriate anesthesia care is provided, there is a greater than 40% chance of financial recovery for the plaintiff in malpractice claims.
Tasa de eventos absoluta: 80% vs 40%
For the past 3 years, the Committee on Professional Liability of the American Society of Anesthesiologists has been studying records of closed malpractice claims files for anesthesia-related patient injuries. The database of 1004 lawsuits was examined to define the impact of the "standard of care," as judged by a practicing group of anesthesiologists, on the likelihood and amount of financial recovery. We found that payment was made in more than 80% of claims made by patients who were judged to have received substandard anesthetic care. Payment also was made in more than 40% of claims when the anesthesia care was judged to be appropriate. We conclude that in the tort-based system of compensation for anesthesia-related injury, the patient has a high probability of financial recovery for injury caused by substandard care. However, if the anesthesiologist provides appropriate care there is still a greater than 40% chance that payment will be made for the claim of malpractice.
Frederick W. Cheney (Fri,) conducted a observational in Anesthesia-related patient injuries (n=1,004). Substandard anesthetic care vs. Appropriate anesthetic care was evaluated on Likelihood of financial recovery (payment made). Substandard anesthetic care resulted in financial recovery in >80% of malpractice claims, while appropriate care still resulted in payment in >40% of claims.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: