Defensive medicine describes behaviours engaged in by physicians, for the purposes of averting the threat of medical negligence litigation and/or complaints. Defensive practice typically encompasses ‘assurance’ or ‘avoidance’ behaviours, or ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ defensive medicine. Assurance behaviours include, for example, meticulous notetaking and ordering further clinically unnecessary tests, whereas avoidance behaviours encompass actions such as refusing to engage with a patient perceived to be high-risk. Whilst such practices may be understandable, defensive medicine is problematic for a number of reasons: it may result in a lower standard of patient care, where for example, a patient is exposed to unnecessary risk(s); and it can increase healthcare costs, which in turn limits resources. Drawing on the findings of a survey of surgeons in Ireland, this study investigates the existence of defensive practices, and explores the impact of the civil and regulatory responses to patient safety incidents on surgical practice. Given the increasing emphasis on patient safety and cultivating a “no-blame” culture both nationally and internationally, the findings of this research illustrate the tension between the current medico-legal and regulatory environment and medical practice, with implications for quality and safety.
History
Publication
European Journal of Health Law;28 (5), pp. 472-489