07-11-2004, 07:52 PM
Quick question. I had always thought of neurology as a fairly low malpractice risk specialty, but then I happened to see a reference to neurology as a high malpractice risk area. A friend then said that Peds Neuro could be high malpractice, but that adult neuro was not.
Realizing that every specialty gets sued, how does adult neurology rank as a malpractice concern area - sued a lot or a little? Premiums high or low vs. other specialties?
Any info is appreciated!
07-12-2004, 10:12 AM
While on neurology elective as an intern, I was rotating with 4 neurologists who were shocked and furious about the jump in malpractice rates. Their group which was hospital based and had an associated medical office practice which gave them a salary of $140k/year. Their malpractice rates went in 2003 to 2004 from $8k per year to $24k per year. The reason cited for this bump is tPA. Mostly of being sued for NOT giving it to the right patient. this is opposed to the more intuitive risk of poor outcome such as bleed.
One of the attendings has left for another state since then, and another is choosing early retirement. That leaves only 2 neurology attendings for a 400 bed hospital and busy practice. The malpractice rate is so high in the state, they say many young grads are opting for EMG fellowships to try to get a higher salary to cover malpractice. Meanwhile the attendings are pulling q2 call from home.......
07-13-2004, 09:35 PM
if you live abroad under different system you are not going to be aware of what is happening here...
In america, lawyers make a living by suing doctors..but different concept that many other countries.
Plus, everything has turned into a big business....
It is lot tougher to practice in America these days...
now if you get sued with very high award the physician may not be able to practice ever again since most insurance companies would not give them policy so therefore hard or nearly impossible to obtain job.
07-24-2004, 04:40 AM
that's b/c malpractice lawyers suck big time...these ba$tards are perhaps the greediest, most spiteful group of people i've ever met. let's hope they get their comeuppance one day.
hypothetical future emergency:
malpractice lawyer's wife is in labor and bleeding...no ob's in area to assist b/c insurance rates in area are too high and b/c the local ob's have been sued and unable to get insured --> lawyer's wife hemorrhages due to placental abruption --> child dies, baby dies.
let's hope these *****holes account for this little scenario, b/c i won't be speeding to their rescue from a county away.
07-24-2004, 04:45 AM
one more thing:
i recently heard something very interesting that happened at an AMA meeting. an oral-maxillofacial surgeon said that he refused to treat malpractice lawyers on the ground that he had an ethical dilemma in treating them...fair enough. then he suggested that doctors as a group should not treat them...i have to say that while the idea did not go anywhere, there was a fleeting moment when i considered his proposal.
i mean, there's no other single profession out there other than malpractice lawyers whose sole purpose of work is to put docs out of business...gee, when i put it that way, maybe i shouldn't treat those losers!