Radiology Malpractice Claims in the United States From 2008 to 2012: Characteristics and Implications
- PMID: 26454772
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.07.013
Radiology Malpractice Claims in the United States From 2008 to 2012: Characteristics and Implications
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the frequency and liability costs associated with radiology malpractice claims relative to other medical services and to evaluate the clinical context and case disposition associated with radiology malpractice claims.
Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was exempted from institutional review board approval. The Comparative Benchmarking System database, a repository of more than 300,000 medical malpractice cases in the United States, was queried for closed claims over a five-year period (2008-2012). Claims were categorized by the medical service primarily responsible for the claim and the paid total loss. For all cases in which radiology was the primary responsible service, the case abstracts were evaluated to determine injury severity, claimant type by setting, claim allegation, process of care involved, case disposition, modality involved, and body section. Intracategory comparisons were made on the basis of the frequency of indemnity payment and total indemnity payment for paid cases, using χ(2) and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.
Results: Radiology was the eighth most likely responsible service to be implicated in a medical malpractice claim, with a median total paid loss (indemnity payment plus defense cost plus administrative expense) per closed case of $30,091 (mean, $205,619 ± $508,883). Radiology claims were most commonly associated with high- and medium-severity injuries (93.3% [820 of 879]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7%-94.95%), the outpatient setting (66.3% [581 of 876]; 95% CI, 63.0%-69.2%), and diagnosis-related allegations (ie, failure to diagnose or delayed diagnosis) (57.3% [504 of 879]; 95% CI, 54.0%-60.6%). A high proportion of claims pertained to cancer diagnoses (44.0% [222 of 504]; 95% CI, 39.7%-48.3%). A total of 62.3% (548 of 879; 95% CI, 59.1%-65.5%) of radiology claims were closed without indemnity payments; 37.7% (331 of 879; 95% CI, 34.5%-40.9%) were closed with a median indemnity payment of $175,000 (range, $112-$6,691,762; mean $481,094 ± $727,636).
Conclusions: Radiology malpractice claims most commonly involve diagnosis-related allegations in the outpatient setting, particularly cancer diagnoses, with approximately one-third of claims resulting in payouts to the claimants.
Keywords: Radiology; damages; law; liability; malpractice; medical malpractice; policy; regulation.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Pediatric radiology malpractice claims - characteristics and comparison to adult radiology claims.Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Jun;47(7):808-816. doi: 10.1007/s00247-017-3873-2. Epub 2017 May 23. Pediatr Radiol. 2017. PMID: 28536766 Review.
-
Missed diagnoses by urologists resulting in malpractice payment.J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2537-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.040. Epub 2007 Oct 15. J Urol. 2007. PMID: 17937958
-
An epidemiologic study of closed emergency department malpractice claims in a national database of physician malpractice insurers.Acad Emerg Med. 2010 May;17(5):553-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00729.x. Acad Emerg Med. 2010. PMID: 20536812
-
Radiology medical malpractice suits in gastrointestinal radiology: prevalence, causes, and outcomes.Emerg Radiol. 2015 Apr;22(2):141-5. doi: 10.1007/s10140-014-1268-3. Epub 2014 Sep 6. Emerg Radiol. 2015. PMID: 25193045
-
The role of radiology in diagnostic error: a medical malpractice claims review.Diagnosis (Berl). 2017 Sep 26;4(3):125-131. doi: 10.1515/dx-2017-0025. Diagnosis (Berl). 2017. PMID: 29536933 Review.
Cited by
-
Case discussions of missed traumatic fractures on computed tomography scans.SA J Radiol. 2022 Nov 30;26(1):2516. doi: 10.4102/sajr.v26i1.2516. eCollection 2022. SA J Radiol. 2022. PMID: 36483672 Free PMC article.
-
A 9-year analysis of medical malpractice litigations in coronary artery bypass grafting in China.J Cardiothorac Surg. 2023 Feb 12;18(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s13019-023-02172-x. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2023. PMID: 36782245 Free PMC article.
-
Contrast Agent Administration as a Source of Liability: A Legal Database Analysis.Radiology. 2023 Sep;308(3):e230802. doi: 10.1148/radiol.230802. Radiology. 2023. PMID: 37724972 Free PMC article.
-
Help, I've been sued! Demystifying the steps of malpractice litigation for the emergency radiologist.Emerg Radiol. 2024 Feb;31(1):97-101. doi: 10.1007/s10140-023-02190-1. Epub 2023 Nov 25. Emerg Radiol. 2024. PMID: 38006518 Review.
-
AI-Assisted X-ray Fracture Detection in Residency Training: Evaluation in Pediatric and Adult Trauma Patients.Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Mar 11;14(6):596. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14060596. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38535017 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources