Related Experiment Videos
Transparent and open discussion of errors does not increase malpractice risk in trauma patients.
Ronald M Stewart1, Michael G Corneille, Joe Johnston
1Department of Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, University Hospital, 78229, USA. stewartr@uthscsa.edu
Annals of Surgery
|April 25, 2006
Summary
Discussing medical errors openly at trauma morbidity and mortality conferences (M&M) does not increase malpractice lawsuit risk. Transparency in patient safety discussions is achievable without undue legal liability for providers.
Area of Science:
- Medical malpractice litigation
- Patient safety
- Trauma surgery
Background:
- Patient safety initiatives advocate for transparency in medical error reporting.
- The legal system's focus on blame may discourage open discussion of errors.
- This study addresses whether patient safety goals can be met without increasing malpractice risk.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine if presenting trauma patient cases at open multidisciplinary morbidity and mortality conferences (M&M) increases the rate of medical malpractice lawsuits.
- To assess the relationship between transparency in M&M conferences and malpractice litigation risk.
Main Methods:
- Utilized trauma registry and risk management database records.
- Analyzed written minutes of trauma M&M conferences at an academic level I trauma center.
- Calculated the incidence of malpractice lawsuits filed after cases were discussed at M&M.
Main Results:
- Seven lawsuits were filed out of 20,749 trauma admissions.
- Only one lawsuit was filed after a patient case was discussed at M&M.
- Patients with complications were significantly more likely to be involved in a lawsuit (P < 0.01).
Conclusions:
- Open discussion of medical errors and complications in M&M conferences does not appear to elevate malpractice lawsuit risk.
- Transparency in patient safety discussions is compatible with managing legal risks.