OT - Analysis: No malpractice crisis

[Guest guest]

http://tinyurl.com/oyd6e

Analysis: No malpractice crisis

WASHINGTON, May 8 (UPI) -- Medical liability insurance premiums,

which have grown slowly and comprise a small part of overall

physician expenses, are not at crisis levels, a new study has found.

" It's clear that the best available evidence we have shows claims of

a crisis are greatly exaggerated, " study lead author Mark Rodwin, a

professor of health law and policy as Suffolk University law school,

told United Press International.

Two bills were being considered in the Senate Monday that would cap

pain-and-suffering damages in medical liability lawsuits, motivated

at least in part by claims that the high-dollar amounts awarded by

juries have made premiums unaffordable for doctors, in turn creating

care access problems for patients.

" Insurance premiums can be hundreds of thousands of dollars per

year, " J. Patchin, a board member of the American Medical

Association, which supports the liability caps, told UPI. " When

premiums escalate, we see doctors relocating, retiring, or

restricting their practice to reduce risk. "

But the study, based on a new data source, challenges the claim that

premiums are going through the roof.

Self-employed physicians paid lower premiums in 2000 than they did in

1986, according to the study of survey data of self-employed

physicians collected by the AMA from 1970 to 2000 that will appear in

the May/June edition of the journal Health Affairs.

In constant 2000 dollars, mean malpractice premiums rose from $5,934

in 1970 to $20,106 in 1986, then declined to $15,478 by 1996. They

then increased again, but in 2000, mean premiums were $18,400, still

below the 1986 level.

In addition, over the same period, premiums decreased from 11 percent

of physician expenses to 7 percent as the cost of operating a

practice skyrocketed from $185,981 to $246,000.

" The real question is why, if everything else is rising at such a

high rate, premiums aren't, " Rodwin said.

The reason earlier studies have found premium increases, he

explained, is that they are based on prices published in the Medical

Liability Monitor Reporter and not on what physicians actually pay.

The AMA data, which are used by many scholars and the Medicare

Payment Advisory Commission, he said, shows that many doctors are

able to negotiate lower rates.

The study also found that the overall trend was virtually identical

across nine national regions, and even high-risk specialties like

obstetrics, surgery and anesthesiology.

Because premiums are such a small part of expenses, Rodwin said, caps

on damages will not solve physician access problems, which are more

likely due to Medicaid reimbursement rates and the high rate of

uninsurance.

A recent study by Emory University professor Thorpe found

that liability caps reduced premiums by about 12 percent, Rodwin

said, but that, given the overall picture, that doesn't amount to

very much.

" Twelve percent of a small number is still a small number, " he said.

The data, which is not more specific than regions, could be

concealing the fact that there are some local crises, he said, but

those crises should not be the impetus for national law changes.

Patchin, however, said because the survey data ends in 2000, it

is " obsolete at best " and doesn't include the recent crisis in the

last six years.

" There have been many changes in the marketplace and premium costs in

the past six years, " she said, and many localities are already

feeling the effects of limited physician services because of the lack

of reform.

In states like Texas, which have already imposed caps, premiums have

gone down significantly and access has increased, she said, and

national liability reform would " help many physicians -- and in turn

patients -- across the country. "

But Rodwin countered that, even if one accepts the 2000 to 2006 MLMR

premium growth data, no crisis becomes apparent because the beginning

fraction of physician expenses attributable to premiums is so

small. " You can do the math - you're still talking small numbers, " he

said. " When someone is harmed or permanently injured, and there's

negligence involved, why not just let them be compensated by private

insurance that doctors can still afford? "

[Guest guest]

The interesting fault in their evidence is there is zero proof that where these caps are put in doctors are paying lower premiums. The actual percentage of total healthcare expenses honestly attributable to malpractice pay-outs is low single digits. "Fixing" lawsuit compensation doesn't help lower anything. On the other hand, fixing the uninsured problem makes everything lower. Most uninsured only seek medical care when it's do or die. i.e.sickness becomes chronic.

Price regulation on the drug industry like we see in the rest of the world fixes a lot of the problems. Rah Rah Boom!

OT - Analysis: No malpractice crisis

http://tinyurl.com/oyd6eAnalysis: No malpractice crisisWASHINGTON, May 8 (UPI) -- Medical liability insurance premiums, which have grown slowly and comprise a small part of overall physician expenses, are not at crisis levels, a new study has found. "It's clear that the best available evidence we have shows claims of a crisis are greatly exaggerated," study lead author Mark Rodwin, a professor of health law and policy as Suffolk University law school, told United Press International. Two bills were being considered in the Senate Monday that would cap pain-and-suffering damages in medical liability lawsuits, motivated at least in part by claims that the high-dollar amounts awarded by juries have made premiums unaffordable for doctors, in turn creating care access problems for patients. "Insurance premiums can be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year," J. Patchin, a board member of the American Medical Association, which supports the liability caps, told UPI. "When premiums escalate, we see doctors relocating, retiring, or restricting their practice to reduce risk." But the study, based on a new data source, challenges the claim that premiums are going through the roof. Self-employed physicians paid lower premiums in 2000 than they did in 1986, according to the study of survey data of self-employed physicians collected by the AMA from 1970 to 2000 that will appear in the May/June edition of the journal Health Affairs. In constant 2000 dollars, mean malpractice premiums rose from $5,934 in 1970 to $20,106 in 1986, then declined to $15,478 by 1996. They then increased again, but in 2000, mean premiums were $18,400, still below the 1986 level. In addition, over the same period, premiums decreased from 11 percent of physician expenses to 7 percent as the cost of operating a practice skyrocketed from $185,981 to $246,000. "The real question is why, if everything else is rising at such a high rate, premiums aren't," Rodwin said. The reason earlier studies have found premium increases, he explained, is that they are based on prices published in the Medical Liability Monitor Reporter and not on what physicians actually pay. The AMA data, which are used by many scholars and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, he said, shows that many doctors are able to negotiate lower rates. The study also found that the overall trend was virtually identical across nine national regions, and even high-risk specialties like obstetrics, surgery and anesthesiology. Because premiums are such a small part of expenses, Rodwin said, caps on damages will not solve physician access problems, which are more likely due to Medicaid reimbursement rates and the high rate of uninsurance. A recent study by Emory University professor Thorpe found that liability caps reduced premiums by about 12 percent, Rodwin said, but that, given the overall picture, that doesn't amount to very much. "Twelve percent of a small number is still a small number," he said. The data, which is not more specific than regions, could be concealing the fact that there are some local crises, he said, but those crises should not be the impetus for national law changes. Patchin, however, said because the survey data ends in 2000, it is "obsolete at best" and doesn't include the recent crisis in the last six years. "There have been many changes in the marketplace and premium costs in the past six years," she said, and many localities are already feeling the effects of limited physician services because of the lack of reform. In states like Texas, which have already imposed caps, premiums have gone down significantly and access has increased, she said, and national liability reform would "help many physicians -- and in turn patients -- across the country." But Rodwin countered that, even if one accepts the 2000 to 2006 MLMR premium growth data, no crisis becomes apparent because the beginning fraction of physician expenses attributable to premiums is so small. "You can do the math - you're still talking small numbers," he said. "When someone is harmed or permanently injured, and there's negligence involved, why not just let them be compensated by private insurance that doctors can still afford?"

[Guest guest]

All true.

But remember, with intervention by the feds, you get mandates.

Got to figure out a way to be able to walk away from the idiots/frauds.

We know what happens when they force it on you.

They did it to our children.

If there were no mandates, this issue would have been solved years ago.

OT - Analysis: No malpractice crisis

http://tinyurl.com/oyd6eAnalysis: No malpractice crisisWASHINGTON, May 8 (UPI) -- Medical liability insurance premiums, which have grown slowly and comprise a small part of overall physician expenses, are not at crisis levels, a new study has found. "It's clear that the best available evidence we have shows claims of a crisis are greatly exaggerated," study lead author Mark Rodwin, a professor of health law and policy as Suffolk University law school, told United Press International. Two bills were being considered in the Senate Monday that would cap pain-and-suffering damages in medical liability lawsuits, motivated at least in part by claims that the high-dollar amounts awarded by juries have made premiums unaffordable for doctors, in turn creating care access problems for patients. "Insurance premiums can be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year," J. Patchin, a board member of the American Medical Association, which supports the liability caps, told UPI. "When premiums escalate, we see doctors relocating, retiring, or restricting their practice to reduce risk." But the study, based on a new data source, challenges the claim that premiums are going through the roof. Self-employed physicians paid lower premiums in 2000 than they did in 1986, according to the study of survey data of self-employed physicians collected by the AMA from 1970 to 2000 that will appear in the May/June edition of the journal Health Affairs. In constant 2000 dollars, mean malpractice premiums rose from $5,934 in 1970 to $20,106 in 1986, then declined to $15,478 by 1996. They then increased again, but in 2000, mean premiums were $18,400, still below the 1986 level. In addition, over the same period, premiums decreased from 11 percent of physician expenses to 7 percent as the cost of operating a practice skyrocketed from $185,981 to $246,000. "The real question is why, if everything else is rising at such a high rate, premiums aren't," Rodwin said. The reason earlier studies have found premium increases, he explained, is that they are based on prices published in the Medical Liability Monitor Reporter and not on what physicians actually pay. The AMA data, which are used by many scholars and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, he said, shows that many doctors are able to negotiate lower rates. The study also found that the overall trend was virtually identical across nine national regions, and even high-risk specialties like obstetrics, surgery and anesthesiology. Because premiums are such a small part of expenses, Rodwin said, caps on damages will not solve physician access problems, which are more likely due to Medicaid reimbursement rates and the high rate of uninsurance. A recent study by Emory University professor Thorpe found that liability caps reduced premiums by about 12 percent, Rodwin said, but that, given the overall picture, that doesn't amount to very much. "Twelve percent of a small number is still a small number," he said. The data, which is not more specific than regions, could be concealing the fact that there are some local crises, he said, but those crises should not be the impetus for national law changes. Patchin, however, said because the survey data ends in 2000, it is "obsolete at best" and doesn't include the recent crisis in the last six years. "There have been many changes in the marketplace and premium costs in the past six years," she said, and many localities are already feeling the effects of limited physician services because of the lack of reform. In states like Texas, which have already imposed caps, premiums have gone down significantly and access has increased, she said, and national liability reform would "help many physicians -- and in turn patients -- across the country." But Rodwin countered that, even if one accepts the 2000 to 2006 MLMR premium growth data, no crisis becomes apparent because the beginning fraction of physician expenses attributable to premiums is so small. "You can do the math - you're still talking small numbers," he said. "When someone is harmed or permanently injured, and there's negligence involved, why not just let them be compensated by private insurance that doctors can still afford?"