• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

限制医疗事故损害赔偿的州法律对医疗保健支出的影响。

The impact of state laws limiting malpractice damage awards on health care expenditures.

作者信息

Hellinger Fred J, Encinosa William E

机构信息

Center for Delivery, Organization, and Markets, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.

出版信息

Am J Public Health. 2006 Aug;96(8):1375-81. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.077883. Epub 2006 Jun 29.

DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2005.077883
PMID:16809580
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1522105/
Abstract

Twenty-eight states have laws that limit payments in malpractice cases, and several studies indicate that these laws reduce the frequency and severity of malpractice claims and lower premiums. Moreover, proponents believe that such laws reduce health care expenditures by reducing the practice of defensive medicine. However, there is a dearth of empirical evidence about the impact of these laws on the cost of health care. We used multivariate models and relatively recent data to estimate the impact of state tort reform laws that directly limit malpractice damage payments on health care expenditures. Estimates from these models suggest that laws limiting malpractice payments lower state health care expenditures by between 3% and 4%.

摘要

28个州制定了限制医疗事故案件赔偿金额的法律,多项研究表明,这些法律降低了医疗事故索赔的频率和严重程度,并降低了保费。此外,支持者认为,此类法律通过减少防御性医疗行为降低了医疗保健支出。然而,关于这些法律对医疗保健成本影响的实证证据却很匮乏。我们使用多变量模型和相对近期的数据来估计直接限制医疗事故损害赔偿的州侵权改革法对医疗保健支出的影响。这些模型的估计结果表明,限制医疗事故赔偿的法律使州医疗保健支出降低了3%至4%。

相似文献

1
The impact of state laws limiting malpractice damage awards on health care expenditures.限制医疗事故损害赔偿的州法律对医疗保健支出的影响。
Am J Public Health. 2006 Aug;96(8):1375-81. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.077883. Epub 2006 Jun 29.
2
Medical malpractice: trends in litigation.医疗事故:诉讼趋势
Gastroenterology. 2008 Jun;134(7):1822-5, 1825.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.05.001. Epub 2008 May 13.
3
The effect of medical malpractice liability on rate of referrals received by specialist physicians.医疗事故责任对专科医生收到转诊率的影响。
Health Econ Policy Law. 2013 Oct;8(4):453-75. doi: 10.1017/S1744133113000157. Epub 2013 Mar 26.
4
The impact of no-fault compensation on health care expenditures: an empirical study of OECD countries.无过错赔偿对医疗保健支出的影响:经合组织国家的实证研究
Health Policy. 2015 Mar;119(3):367-74. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.09.010. Epub 2014 Sep 28.
5
How much does defensive medicine cost?防御性医疗的成本是多少?
J Am Health Policy. 1994 Jul-Aug;4(4):7-15.
6
Rethinking the Obvious: Time for New Ideas on Medical Malpractice Tort Reform.重新审视显而易见之事:是时候提出医疗事故侵权改革的新想法了。
Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2019 Apr/Jun;38(2):109-115. doi: 10.1097/HCM.0000000000000260.
7
Medical malpractice: a crisis in cost and access.医疗事故:成本与可及性方面的危机。
Nurs Manage. 2005 Mar;36(3):22-5. doi: 10.1097/00006247-200503000-00009.
8
Turning from damage caps to information disclosure: an alternative to tort reform.从损害赔偿上限转向信息披露:侵权法改革的替代方案。
Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics. 2005 Winter;5(1):385-98.
9
Tort reform: do details matter?侵权行为法改革:细节重要吗?
Health Econ Policy Law. 2021 Jul;16(3):308-324. doi: 10.1017/S1744133121000025. Epub 2021 Feb 9.
10
Damage caps and defensive medicine, revisited.伤害上限与防御性医疗,再探讨。
J Health Econ. 2017 Jan;51:84-97. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.11.001. Epub 2016 Nov 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Is Myocardial Infarction Overdiagnosed?心肌梗死是否被过度诊断?
JAMA. 2024 May 21;331(19):1623-1624. doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.5235.
2
Medical errors, medical negligence and defensive medicine: A narrative review.医疗差错、医疗过失和防御性医疗:叙事性综述。
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2022 May 28;77:100053. doi: 10.1016/j.clinsp.2022.100053. eCollection 2022.
3
How defensive medicine is defined in European medical literature: a systematic review.欧洲医学文献中对防御性医疗的定义:系统评价。
BMJ Open. 2022 Jan 20;12(1):e057169. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057169.
4
Association Between US Physician Malpractice Claims Rates and Hospital Admission Rates Among Patients With Lower-Risk Syncope.美国低危晕厥患者的医生医疗事故索赔率与住院率之间的关联。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Dec 1;3(12):e2025860. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25860.
5
The impact of tort reform on defensive medicine, quality of care, and physician supply: A systematic review.医疗改革对防御性医疗、医疗质量和医生供应的影响:系统评价。
Health Serv Res. 2019 Aug;54(4):851-859. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13157. Epub 2019 Apr 16.
6
The Impact of State Medical Malpractice Reform on Individual-Level Health Care Expenditures.州医疗事故改革对个人层面医疗保健支出的影响。
Health Serv Res. 2017 Dec;52(6):2018-2037. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12789.
7
The importance of negative defensive medicine in the effects of malpractice reform.消极防御性医疗行为在医疗事故改革效果中的重要性。
Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Apr;17(3):355-69. doi: 10.1007/s10198-015-0687-8. Epub 2015 Apr 9.
8
Perspectives and practical applications of medical oncologists on defensive medicine (SYSIPHUS study): a study of the Palliative Care Working Committee of the Turkish Oncology Group (TOG).肿瘤内科医生对防御性医疗的观点及实际应用(西西弗斯研究):土耳其肿瘤学组(TOG)姑息治疗工作委员会的一项研究
Med Oncol. 2015 Apr;32(4):106. doi: 10.1007/s12032-015-0555-5. Epub 2015 Mar 7.
9
The first survey on defensive medicine in radiation oncology.第一篇关于放射肿瘤学中防御性医疗的调查。
Radiol Med. 2015 May;120(5):421-9. doi: 10.1007/s11547-014-0465-1. Epub 2014 Oct 30.
10
Medical malpractice in connecticut: defensive medicine, real problem or a red herring - example of assessment of quality outcomes variables.康涅狄格州的医疗事故:防御性医疗,是真正的问题还是转移注意力的诱饵——质量结果变量评估示例
Acta Inform Med. 2012 Mar;20(1):32-9. doi: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.32-39.

本文引用的文献

1
The influence of rural location on utilization of formal home care: the role of Medicaid.农村地理位置对正规家庭护理利用情况的影响:医疗补助计划的作用。
Gerontologist. 2004 Oct;44(5):655-64. doi: 10.1093/geront/44.5.655.
2
The medical malpractice 'crisis': recent trends and the impact of state tort reforms.医疗事故“危机”:近期趋势及州侵权行为改革的影响
Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jan-Jun;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-20-30. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.w4.20.
3
The effect of HMOs on fee-for-service health care expenditures: evidence from Medicare revisited.健康维护组织对按服务付费的医疗保健支出的影响:来自医疗保险的再审视证据。
J Health Econ. 2004 Sep;23(5):951-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2004.02.004.
4
Do malpractice concerns, payment mechanisms, and attitudes influence test-ordering decisions?医疗事故担忧、支付机制和态度会影响检查医嘱决策吗?
Neurology. 2004 Jan 13;62(1):119-21. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000101709.87316.0c.
5
The effects of CON repeal on Medicaid nursing home and long-term care expenditures.《平价医疗法案》废除对医疗补助计划养老院及长期护理支出的影响。
Inquiry. 2003 Summer;40(2):146-57. doi: 10.5034/inquiryjrnl_40.2.146.
6
Has the increase in HMO enrollment within the Medicaid population changed the pattern of health service use and expenditures?医疗补助人群中健康维护组织(HMO)参保人数的增加是否改变了医疗服务使用模式和支出情况?
Med Care. 2003 Jul;41(7 Suppl):III24-III34. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000076021.02410.DB.
7
The new medical malpractice crisis.新的医疗事故危机。
N Engl J Med. 2003 Jun 5;348(23):2281-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp030064.
8
Pros and cons of certificates. American Health Planning Association directory suggests that certificate-of-need process is regulatory in theory, not in practice.证书的利弊。美国卫生规划协会名录表明,需求证书程序在理论上是规范性的,但在实践中并非如此。
Mod Healthc. 2003 Apr 21;33(16):4-5, 1.
9
Billions for defense: the pervasive nature of defensive medicine.用于防御的数十亿美元:防御性医疗的普遍存在
Arch Intern Med. 1999 Nov 8;159(20):2399-402. doi: 10.1001/archinte.159.20.2399.
10
Health status of Medicare enrollees in HMOs and fee-for-service in 1994.1994年健康维护组织(HMO)和按服务收费模式下医疗保险参保人的健康状况。
Health Care Financ Rev. 1996 Summer;17(4):65-76.