• E-mail
• Print
• RSS

AMA refutes medical liability study

Credentialing Resource Center Connection, May 11, 2006

Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!

The American Medical Association (AMA) on May 8 issued a statement to refute the "flawed analysis" in a study published in the May/June issue of Health Affairs. The study's authors, a law professor and two law students, contended that perceptions of a liability crisis are overblown based on data from 1970-2000. The AMA, however, says the data are irrelevent because they end "prior to the current medical liability crisis."

The study authors analyzed data from AMA surveys of self-employed physicians from 1970 to 2000 and concluded that other expenses apart from malpractice premiums "represented a much greater share of total practice expenses in 1970 yet increased rapidly until 1996 and moderately thereafter, while spending on premiums fell during 1986-2000," according to the study abstract.

The AMA survey data show that a national average of malpractice premiums were lower in 2000 than in 1986, with similar trends in regional and specialty averages, according to the study. Although premiums rose from 1996 to 2000, practice revenue declined nationally and for specialties.

To read the complete study, visit "Malpractice Premiums and Physicians' Income: Perceptions of a Crisis Conflict with Empirical Evidence," Health Affairs 25, no. 3 (2006): 750-758; for the AMA's official statement, see "AMA refutes bogus medical liability study," AMA press release, May 8, 2006.

Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!

• E-mail to a Colleague
• Print
• RSS
• Archive