The expert witness in malpractice suits

Area of Science:

• Medical Law
• Surgical Practice
• Litigation Analysis

Background:

• Medical malpractice litigation is a significant concern in surgical practice.
• Understanding factors influencing litigation risk and expert witness identification is crucial for surgeons.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze malpractice claims against surgeons in Tennessee.
• To investigate the identification and characteristics of expert witnesses in these claims.
• To assess the perceived importance of expert witnesses among sued surgeons.

Main Methods:

• A survey was distributed to 1,097 Fellows, yielding usable data from 336 surgeons.
• Data included surgeons with malpractice claims between January 1, 1984, and December 31, 1989.
• Information on plaintiff and defense expert witnesses was collected.

Main Results:

• Of 336 surgeons, 129 had malpractice claims.
• Risk varied significantly by surgical specialty; practice population size was not a key factor.
• Plaintiff expert witnesses were identified by 28 surgeons; defense experts by 37.
• No repeat plaintiff expert witnesses were identified in Tennessee during the study period.

Conclusions:

• Surgeons, even those who have faced claims, generally do not focus on identifying opposing expert witnesses.
• Specialty is a more significant factor in malpractice risk than practice location.
• The lack of identified repeat plaintiff experts suggests a fragmented expert witness landscape in Tennessee during this period.