Spinal-related malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA—rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse judgments, and average payments

Abstract

To present overall rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse settlements to the radiologists, and average payments to the plaintiff in spinal-related malpractice suits in a survey of 8,265 radiologists. The malpractice histories of 8,265 radiologists from 36 states were evaluated from credentialing data required of all radiologists participating in the network of One Call Medical Incorporated, a broker for CT/MR in workmen's compensation cases. Two hundred twenty-six of the 8,265 radiologists (31.5 %) had at least one suit. Of the 4,741 total claims, 627 (13.2 %) were related to the bones and adjacent soft tissue. Two hundred and ten (32.9 %) involved the spine. Of these, 70.2 % (134/191) were settled in favor of the plaintiff. One hundred and sixteen (68.2 %) involved the cervical spine with an average settlement of $483,156. Lumbar cases accounted for 28 (16.5 %) of spinal suits, with an average settlement of $119,272. Thoracic cases (26) accounted for only 15.3 % of spinal cases and had an average settlement of $481,608. An allegation of spinal malpractice resulting in a settlement or judgment against the radiologist occurred at a rate of 29.5 cases per 1,000 radiologists' person years. Of the three spinal regions, the cervical spine was the most frequent anatomic site of a malpractice suit and among all those cases settled incurred the highest payment in judgment to the plaintiff.

Medical disciplinary jurisprudence in alleged malpractice in radiology: 10-year Dutch experience

“…Data from the USA show that diagnostic errors are by far the most common cause of malpractice suits, whereas failure to communicate and failure to recommend additional testing are both uncommon reasons for initiating a suit [1,5]. There are relatively few published data regarding malpractice suits against radiologists in Europe [6,7] compared with those against radiologists in the USA [1,2,5,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. The medical disciplinary law system in The Netherlands is unique and essentially different from a medical malpractice claim system, because its main objective is to maintain and improve the quality of healthcare rather than punishing healthcare professionals and/or financially compensating patients [18,19].…”