98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Neurosurgeons, especially spine surgeons, have the highest risk of facing a malpractice claim. Average verdicts in spine surgery litigation has been shown to be over USD $1 million/case. This systematic review aimed to clarify the impact of tort reforms on neurosurgical health care environments across the United States, including patient outcomes, practice of defensive medicine, and physician supply aims.
Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases until May 13, 2022. Study quality was assessed using the quality assessment tool for studies reporting prevalence data.
Results: Five studies (all rated as good quality) were included. Two studies found that in higher-risk state malpractice environments, risk of postoperative complications was higher and odds of nonhome discharge were larger (odds ratio 1.1169, 95% confidence interval 1.139-1.200). One study found that neurosurgeons reported practice of defensive medicine by ordering more imaging in a higher-risk environment, while this was not shown in a study examining imaging rates in different medicolegal environments. One study observed that noneconomic damage caps were associated with a 3.9% increase of physician supply in high-risk specialties.
Conclusions: There was a suggestive association between tort reforms and less practice of defensive medicine among neurosurgeons, improvement in postoperative outcomes in spinal fusion patients, and increase in physician supply. More elaborate studies on the medicolegal environment in neurosurgical practice are needed to give more insight on the current size of the problem that litigation presents in the United States and the effects tort reforms have on neurosurgical health care environments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.02.072 | DOI Listing |
Health Econ
August 2025
Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Noneconomic damage caps are controversial because they seek to balance uncertain benefits through reductions in physician precautionary costs, against uncertain harms to patient welfare. Opposing policy actions at the state-level reflect this controversy as some states have enacted noneconomic damage caps over the past few decades while others repealed their caps. Our difference-in-differences analyses suggest that repeals increase premiums.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Surg
July 2025
Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Health Promot Int
July 2025
Ngāi Tāmanuhiri, Rongowhakaata, Ngāti Kahungunu, Aotearoa, New Zealand.
The tobacco and nicotine industry, embedded in colonial exploitation and racialised harm, remains a leading cause of preventable disease, death, and intergenerational trauma. This article presents a transformative abolitionist public health framework, grounded in Indigenous-led principles of sovereignty, truth-telling, love, and justice. It aims to dismantle the structural drivers of harm perpetuated by the industry.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur J Health Law
July 2025
Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology 1969 Brisbane City, QLD Australia.
Significant amendments to the Belgian Act on Euthanasia were passed in March 2024. The amendments altered the registration form which physicians submit for oversight after the patient has died, the penalties for non-compliance with the law, and the potential liability of practitioners who provide an independent advice in a euthanasia assessment. Two of these amendments addressed judgements delivered by the Belgian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFTob Control
June 2025
School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) have never been legal to sell as consumer products in Australia. However, a substantial illicit market in NVPs developed with retailers selling these products under the pretence of retailing nicotine-free vaping products (NFVPs), which were legal to sell in most states and territories until July 2024. Australia implemented a 'light touch' medicines regulation approach for NVPs in October 2021, in response to public concerns about a growing number of young people vaping while retaining access to NVPs for smoking cessation purposes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF