Radiologists differ from other specialists as expert legal witnesses—here’s how
Medical experts testifying in malpractice suits for the defense tend to have higher objective indicators of erudition—academic posts, scholarly publications and the like—than peers testifying for the plaintiff.
Radiologists buck this pattern, according to a study conducted at Emory University and published online May 30 in JACR [1].
Citing prior research finding the norm holding across anesthesiology, neurosurgery, orthopedic surgery, and otolaryngology, the authors point out that the makeup of expert radiology witnesses has been heretofore unknown—despite the documented frequency with which radiologists serve in this capacity (44% of neuroradiologists alone, according to one study).
“Such information could inform ongoing development of guidelines and best practice documents,” write lead author Kenneth Tharp, MD, MBA, MPH, senior author Richard Dusza Jr., MD, and colleagues.
The team’s key finding: Radiologists serving as medical malpractice expert witnesses—for either defense or plaintiff—“display similar qualifications across a variety of characteristics.”
Author Observations on Radiologists Serving as Medical Malpractice Expert Witnesses
Along with academic appointments and peer-reviewed publications and citations, the characteristics signifying objective expertise for the study included years of post-training practice experience, percentages of subspecialist vs. generalist designations and H-indices (quantifications of an investigator’s scientific output as a single number).
The datasets Tharp and colleagues used were from publicly available court records as well as Medicare claims. The researchers mined the data in similar fashion to researchers examining other specialties so as to facilitate head-to-head comparisons.
The initial radiology-specific searches turned up 1,042 potential cases, which they whittled for analysis to 231 representative lawsuits with testimony from 179 radiologists. Of these, 143 testified in one case (58 defense, 85 plaintiff) and 36 testified in multiple cases (10 defense-only, 14 plaintiff-only, 12 both).
Other observations the authors came away with:
- Published practice parameter guidelines in radiology and radiology experts’ ability to blindly review archived original images might together explain the … discordance [between radiology and other specialties].
- Although defense-only experts had slightly fewer years of practice experience than plaintiff-only experts, the two groups were otherwise similar in both practice type and subspecialty mix as well as numbers of publications, citations and h-indices.
Does Expert Radiology Malpractice Litigation Often Result in Favor of the Plaintiff?
In their discussion, Tharp et al. comment that, given radiology’s relatively level “expert playing field,” a casual observer “might expect radiology malpractice litigation to more frequently result in favor of the plaintiff compared with specialties like anesthesiology, neurosurgery and orthopedic surgery, in which defense expert witnesses have been described as displaying higher objective qualifications.”
However, the annual incidence of malpractice payouts for neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons “is substantially higher than that for radiologists, and the incidence of payouts for anesthesiologists is similar. More study is thus warranted to assess if or how expert qualifications affect the outcomes of malpractice litigation by specialty.”
More:
Since physician expert testimony can be lucrative, some radiologists seeking to enhance their incomes might find it easier to market their expert witness services by historically presenting testimony that advances a particular side’s cause, despite professional society guidelines that call for objectivity and impartiality. Since most professional organizations serve in the name of justice rather than for one side or the other, consistent single-side testimony may not play well with juries who might consider these individuals ‘hired guns.’”
More Coverage of Radiology in Malpractice Actions:
71% of radiologists named in a malpractice lawsuit, though numbers are down during pandemic
Medical malpractice and AI: 4 response strategies when rejecting an algorithm’s advice backfires
The top 7 ways radiologists can avoid medical malpractice claims
Radiologist dodges malpractice death suit after mistaking diagnostic mammogram for routine screening
Reference:
- Kenneth Tharp, Stefan Santavicca, Danny Hughes, Divya Kishore, John Banja, Richard Duszak Jr., “Characteristics of Radiologists Serving as Medical Malpractice Expert Witnesses for Defense Versus Plaintiff.” Journal of the American College of Radiology, May 30, 2022. DOI: doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2022.04.005
Dave P. has worked in journalism, marketing and public relations for more than 30 years, frequently concentrating on hospitals, healthcare technology and Catholic communications. He has also specialized in fundraising communications, ghostwriting for CEOs of local, national and global charities, nonprofits and foundations.