Mizushima Yuji, Whaley Christopher, Yu Hao
RAND, Santa Monica, California, USA.
Brown Univeristy, School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Health Econ. 2025 Aug 31. doi: 10.1002/hec.70032.
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reflect this controversy as some states have enacted noneconomic damage caps over the past few decades while others repealed their caps.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. These increases are larger after State Supreme Court decisions, affecting all cases in a state, compared with State Circuit Court decisions affecting only specific cases. Magnitudes differ by physician specialty, with larger effects observed in obstetrics/gynecology and general surgery, compared with internal medicine. Our estimates of these repeals are larger than estimates on enactments reported in the literature, suggesting a potential asymmetry between enacting and repealing damage caps.
非经济损害赔偿上限存在争议,因为它们试图通过降低医生的预防成本来平衡不确定的收益,同时应对对患者福利的不确定损害。州一级的相反政策行动反映了这一争议,因为在过去几十年里,一些州制定了非经济损害赔偿上限,而另一些州则废除了这些上限。我们的双重差分分析表明,废除上限会提高保费。与仅影响特定案件的州巡回法院判决相比,在州最高法院判决后,这些保费上涨幅度更大,因为州最高法院的判决会影响一个州的所有案件。保费上涨幅度因医生专业而异,与内科相比,妇产科和普通外科的影响更大。我们对这些废除上限的估计比文献中报道的对制定上限的估计要大,这表明在制定和废除损害赔偿上限之间可能存在不对称性。