Patient characteristics of, and remedial interventions for, complaints and medico-legal claims against doctors: a rapid review of the literature

BACKGROUND

It is uncertain if patient's characteristics are associated with complaints and claims against doctors. Additionally, evidence for the effectiveness of remedial interventions on rates of complaints and claims against doctors has not been synthesised.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid review of recent literature to answer: Question 1 "What are the common characteristics and circumstances of patients who are most likely to complain or bring a claim about the care they have received from a doctor?" and Question 2 "What initiatives or interventions have been shown to be effective at reducing complaints and claims about the care patients have received from a doctor?". We used a systematic search (most recently in July 2023) of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature. Studies were screened against inclusion criteria and critically appraised in duplicate using standard tools. Results were summarised using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

From 8079 search results, we reviewed the full text of 250 studies. We included 25 studies: seven for Question 1 (6 comparative studies with controls and one systematic review) and 18 studies for Question 2 (14 uncontrolled pre-post studies, 2 comparative studies with controls and 2 systematic reviews). Most studies were set in hospitals across a mix of medical specialties. Other than for patients with mental health conditions (two studies), no other patient characteristics demonstrated either a strong or consistent effect on the rate of complaints or claims against their treating doctors. Risk management programs (6 studies), and communication and resolution programs (5 studies) were the most studied of 6 intervention types. Evidence for reducing complaints and medico-legal claims, costs or premiums and more timely management was apparent for both types of programs. Only 1 to 3 studies were included for peer programs, medical remediation, shared decision-making, simulation training and continuing professional development, with few generalisable results.

CONCLUSION

Few patient characteristics can be reliably related to the likelihood of medico-legal complaints or claims. There is some evidence that interventions can reduce the number and costs of claims, the number of complaints, and the timeliness of claims. However, across both questions, the strength of the evidence is very weak and is based on only a few studies or study designs that are highly prone to bias.

Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission-Part II: How Communication and Resolution Programs Promote Patient Safety and Trust

When patients are harmed by health care, concerns fan out in all directions. Patients and families confront a sea of uncertainty, contending with injuries that drain them physically, emotionally, and financially. Health care professionals experience a powerful mix of emotions, but are seldom afforded the time to process what happened or the resources to relieve suffering and prevent harm. Honesty, transparency, and empathy are indispensable to a comprehensive approach that prioritizes patient and family-centered response to unintended harm, clinical improvement, and redemptive peer review. Part 2 introduces the second of three pillars for advancing the clinical mission: communication and transparency.

Medical Malpractice: Reform for Today's Patients and Clinicians

The current system of medical malpractice does a poor job of serving the best interests of physicians or patients. Economic and societal forces are shifting the nature of health care from the individual physician to a system of health care professionals, characterized by accountable care organizations. In particular, more physicians are employed, quality and outcomes are routinely measured, and reimbursement is moving to value-based purchasing. Medical malpractice likewise needs to transition to a new model that is consistent with the modern era of patient-centered care. Collective accountability, the concept that patient care is the responsibility of all the members of the health care organization, requires malpractice reform that reflects a systems-based practice of medicine. Enterprise liability, coupled with medical error communication and resolution programs, provides the legal framework necessary for the patient-centered practice of medicine in today's environment.