Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Evaluative reports on medical malpractice policies in obstetrics: a rapid scoping review

Authors: Roberta Cardoso, Wasifa Zarin, Vera Nincic, Sarah Louise Barber, Ahmet Metin Gulmezoglu, Charlotte Wilson, Katherine Wilson, Heather McDonald, Meghan Kenny, Rachel Warren, Sharon E. Straus, Andrea C. Tricco

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The clinical specialty of obstetrics is under particular scrutiny with increasing litigation costs and unnecessary tests and procedures done in attempts to prevent litigation. We aimed to identify reports evaluating or comparing the effectiveness of medical liability reforms and quality improvement strategies in improving litigation-related outcomes in obstetrics.

Methods

We conducted a rapid scoping review with a 6-week timeline. MEDLINE, EMBASE, LexisNexis Academic, the Legal Scholarship Network, Justis, LegalTrac, QuickLaw, and HeinOnline were searched for publications in English from 2004 until June 2015. The selection criteria for screening were established a priori and pilot-tested. We included reports comparing or evaluating the impact of obstetrics-related medical liability reforms and quality improvement strategies on cost containment and litigation settlement across all countries. All levels of screening were done by two reviewers independently, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. In addition, two reviewers independently extracted relevant data using a pre-tested form, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The results were summarized descriptively.

Results

The search resulted in 2729 citations, of which 14 reports met our eligibility criteria. Several initiatives for improving the medical malpractice litigation system were found, including no-fault approaches, patient safety policy initiatives, communication and resolution, caps on compensation and attorney fees, alternative payment system and liabilities, and limitations on litigation.

Conclusions

Only a few litigation policies in obstetrics were evaluated or compared. Included documents showed that initiatives to reduce medical malpractice litigation could be associated with a decrease in adverse and malpractice events. However, due to heterogeneous settings (e.g., economic structure, healthcare system) and variation in the outcomes reported, the advantages and disadvantages of initiatives may vary.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Knox GE, Simpson KR, Garite TJ. High reliability perinatal units: an approach to the prevention of patient injury and medical malpractice claims. J Healthc Risk Manag. 1999;19(2):24–32.CrossRefPubMed Knox GE, Simpson KR, Garite TJ. High reliability perinatal units: an approach to the prevention of patient injury and medical malpractice claims. J Healthc Risk Manag. 1999;19(2):24–32.CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
go back to reference Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? Br Med J. 2002;324(7342):892.CrossRef Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? Br Med J. 2002;324(7342):892.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Chandraharan E. Fetal scalp blood sampling during labour: is it a useful diagnostic test or a historical test that no longer has a place in modern clinical obstetrics? BJOG. 2014;121(9):1056–60. discussion 60-2.CrossRefPubMed Chandraharan E. Fetal scalp blood sampling during labour: is it a useful diagnostic test or a historical test that no longer has a place in modern clinical obstetrics? BJOG. 2014;121(9):1056–60. discussion 60-2.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Cortez N. A medical malpractice model for developing countries? Drexel Law Review. 2011;4:217–41. Cortez N. A medical malpractice model for developing countries? Drexel Law Review. 2011;4:217–41.
8.
go back to reference Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. Neglected ethical dimensions of the professional liability crisis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(5):1198–200.CrossRefPubMed Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. Neglected ethical dimensions of the professional liability crisis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(5):1198–200.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Pearlman MD. Patient safety in obstetrics and gynecology: an agenda for the future. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(5):1266–71.CrossRefPubMed Pearlman MD. Patient safety in obstetrics and gynecology: an agenda for the future. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(5):1266–71.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Furrow BR. The patient injury epidemic: medical malpractice litigation as a curative tool. Drexel Law Review. 2011;4(41):41–107. Furrow BR. The patient injury epidemic: medical malpractice litigation as a curative tool. Drexel Law Review. 2011;4(41):41–107.
11.
go back to reference Hannah AR. A look into the magic eight ball: would health courts survive judicial scrutiny in Missouri? “signs point to yes”. UMKC Law Rev. 2009;77(3):811. Hannah AR. A look into the magic eight ball: would health courts survive judicial scrutiny in Missouri? “signs point to yes”. UMKC Law Rev. 2009;77(3):811.
13.
go back to reference Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Stone PW. Popping the (PICO) question in research and evidence-based practice. Appl Nurs Res. 2002;15:197–8.CrossRefPubMed Stone PW. Popping the (PICO) question in research and evidence-based practice. Appl Nurs Res. 2002;15:197–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
19.
go back to reference Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):141–6.CrossRefPubMed Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):141–6.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien K, Colquhoun H, Kastner M, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien K, Colquhoun H, Kastner M, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Behrens MA. Medical liability reform: a case study of Mississippi. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(2 Pt 1):335–9.CrossRefPubMed Behrens MA. Medical liability reform: a case study of Mississippi. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(2 Pt 1):335–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Edwards CT. The impact of a no-fault tort reform on physician decision-making: a look at Virgina’s birth injury program. Rev Jurid Univ P R. 2010;80:285–310. Edwards CT. The impact of a no-fault tort reform on physician decision-making: a look at Virgina’s birth injury program. Rev Jurid Univ P R. 2010;80:285–310.
24.
go back to reference Ho B, Liu E. What’s an apology worth? Decomposing the effect of apologies on medical malpractice payments using state apology laws. J Empir Leg Stud. 2011;8(S1):177–99. Ho B, Liu E. What’s an apology worth? Decomposing the effect of apologies on medical malpractice payments using state apology laws. J Empir Leg Stud. 2011;8(S1):177–99.
25.
go back to reference Iizuka T. Does higher malpractice pressure deter medical errors? J Law Econ. 2013;56(1):161–88.CrossRef Iizuka T. Does higher malpractice pressure deter medical errors? J Law Econ. 2013;56(1):161–88.CrossRef
26.
27.
go back to reference Milne JK, Walker DE, Vlahaki D. Reflections on the Canadian MORE(OB) obstetrical risk management programme. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(4):563–9.CrossRefPubMed Milne JK, Walker DE, Vlahaki D. Reflections on the Canadian MORE(OB) obstetrical risk management programme. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(4):563–9.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Winn SH. Assessing and credentialing standards of care: the UK Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST, Maternity). Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21(4):537–55.CrossRefPubMed Winn SH. Assessing and credentialing standards of care: the UK Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST, Maternity). Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21(4):537–55.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Santos P, Ritter GA, Hefele JL, Hendrich A, McCoy CK. Decreasing intrapartum malpractice: targeting the most injurious neonatal adverse events. J Healthc Risk Manag. 2015;34(4):20–7.CrossRefPubMed Santos P, Ritter GA, Hefele JL, Hendrich A, McCoy CK. Decreasing intrapartum malpractice: targeting the most injurious neonatal adverse events. J Healthc Risk Manag. 2015;34(4):20–7.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Currie J, MacLeod WB. First do no harm? Tort reform and birth outcomes. Q J Econ. 2008;123(2):795–830.CrossRef Currie J, MacLeod WB. First do no harm? Tort reform and birth outcomes. Q J Econ. 2008;123(2):795–830.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Kachalia A, Kaufman SR, Boothman R, Anderson S, Welch K, Saint S, et al. Liability claims and costs before and after implementation of a medical error disclosure program. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(4):213–21.CrossRefPubMed Kachalia A, Kaufman SR, Boothman R, Anderson S, Welch K, Saint S, et al. Liability claims and costs before and after implementation of a medical error disclosure program. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(4):213–21.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Kilgore ML, Morrisey MA, Nelson LJ. Tort law and medical malpractice insurance premiums. Inquiry. 2006;43(3):255–70.PubMed Kilgore ML, Morrisey MA, Nelson LJ. Tort law and medical malpractice insurance premiums. Inquiry. 2006;43(3):255–70.PubMed
33.
go back to reference Thorpe KE. The medical malpractice ‘crisis’: recent trends and the impact of state tort reforms. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-20-30. Thorpe KE. The medical malpractice ‘crisis’: recent trends and the impact of state tort reforms. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-20-30.
34.
go back to reference Studdert DM, Yang YT, Mello MM. Are damages caps regressive? A study of malpractice jury verdicts in California. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(4):54–67.CrossRef Studdert DM, Yang YT, Mello MM. Are damages caps regressive? A study of malpractice jury verdicts in California. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(4):54–67.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluative reports on medical malpractice policies in obstetrics: a rapid scoping review
Authors
Roberta Cardoso
Wasifa Zarin
Vera Nincic
Sarah Louise Barber
Ahmet Metin Gulmezoglu
Charlotte Wilson
Katherine Wilson
Heather McDonald
Meghan Kenny
Rachel Warren
Sharon E. Straus
Andrea C. Tricco
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0569-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Systematic Reviews 1/2017 Go to the issue