An Effective Program to Reduce Malpractice Claims and Payments in a Large Orthopaedic Practice.

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume Pub Date : 2024-07-17 Epub Date: 2024-04-25 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.23.00973
Thomas W Doub, Gerald B Hickson, Virginia F Casey, Damian F McHugh, Peter Nonken, Thomas F Catron, Henry J Domenico, James W Pichert, William O Cooper
{"title":"An Effective Program to Reduce Malpractice Claims and Payments in a Large Orthopaedic Practice.","authors":"Thomas W Doub, Gerald B Hickson, Virginia F Casey, Damian F McHugh, Peter Nonken, Thomas F Catron, Henry J Domenico, James W Pichert, William O Cooper","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.00973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High reliability in health care requires a balance between intentionally designed systems and individual professional accountability. One element of accountability includes a process for addressing clinicians whose practices are associated with a disproportionate share of patient complaints. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the Patient Advocacy Reporting System (PARS), a tiered intervention model to reduce patient complaints about clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving a southeastern U.S. orthopaedic group practice. The study assessed the implementation of the PARS program and subsequent malpractice claims from 2004 to 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The implementation of PARS was associated with an 83% reduction in malpractice claims cost per high-risk clinician after intervention (p = 0.05; Wilcoxon rank sum test). The overall practice group experienced an 87% reduction in mean annual claims cost per clinician (p = 0.007; segmented regression). The successful adoption required essential elements such as PARS champions, peer messengers, an Office of Patient Affairs, and a clear statement of practice values and professionalism expectations at the time of onboarding.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The PARS program was successfully adopted within a surgical specialty group as a part of ongoing risk prevention and management efforts. The period following PARS was associated with a retrospectively measured reduction in malpractice claim costs. The PARS program can be effectively implemented in a large, single-specialty orthopaedic practice setting and, although not necessarily causal, was, in our case, associated with a period of reduced malpractice claim costs.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>We have learned in previous research that there are clear links between professionalism and patient outcomes (e.g., surgical complications), but agree that the focus here on medical malpractice is not directly clinical.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.00973","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: High reliability in health care requires a balance between intentionally designed systems and individual professional accountability. One element of accountability includes a process for addressing clinicians whose practices are associated with a disproportionate share of patient complaints. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the Patient Advocacy Reporting System (PARS), a tiered intervention model to reduce patient complaints about clinicians.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving a southeastern U.S. orthopaedic group practice. The study assessed the implementation of the PARS program and subsequent malpractice claims from 2004 to 2020.

Results: The implementation of PARS was associated with an 83% reduction in malpractice claims cost per high-risk clinician after intervention (p = 0.05; Wilcoxon rank sum test). The overall practice group experienced an 87% reduction in mean annual claims cost per clinician (p = 0.007; segmented regression). The successful adoption required essential elements such as PARS champions, peer messengers, an Office of Patient Affairs, and a clear statement of practice values and professionalism expectations at the time of onboarding.

Conclusions: The PARS program was successfully adopted within a surgical specialty group as a part of ongoing risk prevention and management efforts. The period following PARS was associated with a retrospectively measured reduction in malpractice claim costs. The PARS program can be effectively implemented in a large, single-specialty orthopaedic practice setting and, although not necessarily causal, was, in our case, associated with a period of reduced malpractice claim costs.

Clinical relevance: We have learned in previous research that there are clear links between professionalism and patient outcomes (e.g., surgical complications), but agree that the focus here on medical malpractice is not directly clinical.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在一家大型矫形外科诊所中减少医疗事故索赔和付款的有效计划。
背景:医疗保健的高可靠性要求在有意设计的系统和个人专业责任之间取得平衡。问责制的一个要素包括一个程序,用于处理那些与患者投诉比例过高有关的临床医生。本研究旨在评估 "患者权益报告系统"(PARS)的影响,该系统是一种分层干预模式,旨在减少患者对临床医生的投诉:方法:研究人员对美国东南部的一家骨科团体诊所进行了一项回顾性队列研究。研究评估了 PARS 计划的实施情况以及 2004 年至 2020 年期间的后续医疗事故索赔情况:结果:实施 PARS 后,每名高风险临床医生的医疗事故索赔成本降低了 83%(p = 0.05;Wilcoxon 秩和检验)。整个实践小组每位临床医生的年平均索赔成本降低了 87%(p = 0.007;分段回归)。成功采用该计划需要一些基本要素,如 PARS 倡导者、同行信使、患者事务办公室,以及在入职时对实践价值和专业期望的明确声明:结论:作为持续风险预防和管理工作的一部分,PARS 计划在一家外科专科医院成功实施。经回顾性测算,PARS 项目实施后,医疗事故索赔成本有所下降。PARS计划可以在大型、单一专科的骨科实践环境中有效实施,虽然不一定是因果关系,但在我们的案例中,PARS计划与渎职索赔费用的减少有关:临床相关性:我们在以往的研究中了解到,专业精神与患者的治疗效果(如手术并发症)之间存在明显的联系,但我们也同意,这里对医疗事故的关注并非直接针对临床。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
期刊最新文献
Demographics, Indications, and Revision Rates for Radial Head Arthroplasty: Analysis of Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Patients' Preferences for Bone-Anchored Prostheses After Lower-Extremity Amputation: A 2-Center Discrete Choice Experiment in The Netherlands (PREFER-BAP-1). What's Important: Building the Practice Your Community Needs. An In-Depth Analysis of Public and Private Research Funding in Orthopaedic Surgery from 2015 to 2021. AOA Critical Issues Symposium: Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Orthopaedic Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1