Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Journal of Legal Medicine 3/2021

12.08.2020 | Original Article

Inequality in the last resort: how medical appraisal affects malpractice litigations in China

verfasst von: Fengbo Liang, Junqiang Liu, Hui Zhou, Paicheng Liu

Erschienen in: International Journal of Legal Medicine | Ausgabe 3/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Medical malpractice litigations affect the practices of patient safety. However, medical malpractice litigations involve highly specialized knowledge. Thus, medical appraisal is usually essential in the ascertainment of responsibility and judicial decision-making. China’s judicial system is characterized by a dual-mode of medical appraisal resulting from two parallel appraisal agencies: judicial appraisal institutions and medical associations. This paper examines whether or not and how choices of different medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice lawsuit results in China.

Methods

We collected and sampled a total of 2557 verdicts pertaining to medical disputes from “China Judgements Online” in 2014. We used an ordinary least square regression model and a mediating effect regression model to analyze to what extent and how different choices between two medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice litigations.

Results

(1) Almost 81.55% (2082) of litigants resorted to medical malpractice appraisals in China in 2014. Among 2070 cases with appraisal results accepted by the court, 60.10% of the litigants chose judicial appraisal institutions (1244), as opposed to medical associations (826). (2) Among 2557 cases, 2306 (90.18%) claimed compensation and 1919 (83.22%) were awarded compensation by the courts. The proportion of compensation paid in a case is 48% on average. (3) Appraisal agencies matter in the investigation of medical errors, which in turn affects the proportion of compensation paid in a case. (4) Choosing judicial appraisal institutions will raise the proportion of compensation paid by about 10% on average.

Conclusions

Different choices between appraisal institutions affect malpractice litigations in China. As the last resort for remedying medical malpractice, medical appraisals in the judicial system could be a source of inequality in China’s medical litigation outcomes.
Fußnoten
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Amaral-Garcia S (2015) Non-economic damages in medical malpractice appeals: does the jurisdiction make a difference? DIW Discussion Papers, No. 1506, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin Amaral-Garcia S (2015) Non-economic damages in medical malpractice appeals: does the jurisdiction make a difference? DIW Discussion Papers, No. 1506, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin
6.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Tiede L (2006) Judicial independence: often cited, rarely understood. J Contemp Leg Issues 15:129 Tiede L (2006) Judicial independence: often cited, rarely understood. J Contemp Leg Issues 15:129
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Angell M (1996) Special article Shattuck lecture — evaluating the health risks of breast implants : the. N Engl J Med 334:1513–1518 Angell M (1996) Special article Shattuck lecture — evaluating the health risks of breast implants : the. N Engl J Med 334:1513–1518
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Katz J (1992) “The fallacy of the impartial expert” revisited. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law 20:141–152PubMed Katz J (1992) “The fallacy of the impartial expert” revisited. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law 20:141–152PubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Li P, Xiao P (2013) Chinese authentication for medical malpractice research review. Evid Sci 21:229–239 Li P, Xiao P (2013) Chinese authentication for medical malpractice research review. Evid Sci 21:229–239
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Sloan FA, Hsieh CR (1990) Variability in medical malpractice payments : is the compensation fair ? Law Soc Rev 24:997–1040CrossRef Sloan FA, Hsieh CR (1990) Variability in medical malpractice payments : is the compensation fair ? Law Soc Rev 24:997–1040CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Bollen KA, Stinet R (1990) Direct and indirect effects : classical and bootstrap estimates of variability Author ( s ): Kenneth A . Bollen and Robert Stine Published by : American Sociological Association Stable URL : http://www.jstor.org/stable/271084 Your use of the JSTOR archive. Sociol Methodol 20:115–140 Bollen KA, Stinet R (1990) Direct and indirect effects : classical and bootstrap estimates of variability Author ( s ): Kenneth A . Bollen and Robert Stine Published by : American Sociological Association Stable URL : http://​www.​jstor.​org/​stable/​271084 Your use of the JSTOR archive. Sociol Methodol 20:115–140
Metadaten
Titel
Inequality in the last resort: how medical appraisal affects malpractice litigations in China
verfasst von
Fengbo Liang
Junqiang Liu
Hui Zhou
Paicheng Liu
Publikationsdatum
12.08.2020
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
International Journal of Legal Medicine / Ausgabe 3/2021
Print ISSN: 0937-9827
Elektronische ISSN: 1437-1596
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-020-02386-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2021

International Journal of Legal Medicine 3/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet Rechtsmedizin