ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Subject

Browsing by Subject "Malpractice"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ASO Author Reflections: National Analysis of Breast Surgery Malpractice Cases: A Teachable Moment?
    (Springer, 2021-12) James, Ted A.; Fan, Betty; Surgery, School of Medicine
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    High and low-risk specialties experience with the U.S. medical malpractice system
    (Springer Nature, 2013-11-06) Carroll, Aaron E.; Buddenbaum, Jennifer L.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: "High-liability risk specialties" tend to be the focus of medical malpractice system research and debate, but concerns and fears are not limited to this group. The objective of this study was to examine whether "high-liability risk" medical specialties have a different experience with the malpractice system than "low-liability risk" specialties. Methods: We reviewed claims data from the Physician Insurers Association of America's Data Sharing Project between January 1985 and December 2008. We used linear regression, controlling for year, to determine how liability risk affected outcomes of interest. Results: In high-liability risk specialties, 33% of claims result in indemnity payments compared to 28% for low-liability risk specialties (p < 0.001). The average indemnity payment for high-liability risk specialties was $315,314 compared to $267,146 for low-liability risk specialties (p = 0.25). Although only a small percentage of claims go to trial, low-liability risk specialties have significantly more claims that are ultimately dropped, withdrawn or dismissed, while high-liability risk specialties have significantly more claims that result in plaintiff settlement (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Malpractice risk exists for all specialties. Variability in indemnity costs are found in both high- and low-liability risk specialties. Differences in the reasons for which claims are initiated for high- and low-liability risk specialties likely necessitate different risk management solutions.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    “If your feelings were hurt, I’m sorry…”: How Third-Year Medical Students Observe, Learn From, and Engage in Apologies
    (Springer, 2021) Fischer, Ian C.; Frankel, Richard M.; Psychology, School of Science
    Background: Apologies may play a significant role in medical care, especially in the context of patient safety, medical error disclosure, and malpractice. Studies have shown that when state laws, institutional policies, and individual skills align-including the ability to offer a sincere apology-patients and families benefit. However, little is known about how, and under what conditions, physicians offer apologies in day-to-day care. Even less is known about what medical students learn about apologies from observing their superiors in these settings. Objective: Characterize third-year medical students' experiences of observing and engaging in apologies. Design: Qualitative descriptive analysis of student professionalism narratives. Participants: Third-year medical students at Indiana University School of Medicine. Approach: A search of 7,384 unique narratives yielded 238 with apologies. A rubric based on four key elements of genuine apologies ((1) acknowledgement, (2) explanation, (3) regret/remorse, and (4) reparation) was used to classify the kind of apology offered. Apology completeness, impact, and timing were also coded. Key results: Seventeen percent of all apologies were complete (i.e., contained all four elements). Over 40% were coded as incomplete or "non-apology" apologies (i.e., those with only the first two elements). A significant relationship between apology completeness and positive student experience was found. Most apologies were offered by the attending physician or resident to patients and family members. Students were generally positive about their experiences, but one in five were coded as negative. Some students were distressed enough to offer apologies on behalf of the faculty. Apology timing did not make a significant difference in terms of student experience. Conclusions: Few education programs target apologies in the context of routine practice. With little formal instruction, students may rely on adopting what their seniors do. Faculty have an important role to play in modeling the apology process when harms-both great and small-occur.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University