Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T01:28:28.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medical Uncertainty, Diagnostic Testing, and Legal Liability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2021

Eric E. Fortess  and
Marshall B. Kapp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Health care cost considerations exert increasing influence today over clinical decision-making. One way to help contain costs while maintaining the quality of health care may be to increase among both physicians and patients an acknowledgment of, and tolerance for, a reasonahle degree of medical uncertainty. By medical uncertainty we mean here those clinical situations in which, based on available data, absolute scientific proof regarding some aspect of a patient's heallh status cannot be obtained.

To the extent that acceptance of medical uncertainty and a corresponding restraint among physicians can he encouraged without exposing the physicians to an undue risk of legal liability, all participants in the health care system would benefit from this tolerance. To help provide this encouragement. we will explore the legal implications of medical uncertainty, focusing on diagnostic testing, and argue that our legal system does now and will continue to recognize, tolerate, and perhaps even promote some medical uncertainty in the diagnostic realm.

Type
Article
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 13 , Issue 5 , October 1985 , pp. 213 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bursztajn, H., et al., Medical Choices, Medical Chances (Delacorte Press, New York, 1981), 23–26.Google Scholar
President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Making Health Care Decisions (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC., 1982) (hereinafter cited as President's Commission), 1:85, 89.Google Scholar
Reuben, D.B., Learning Diagnostic Restraint, New England Journal of Medicine 310(9):591–93 (March 1, 1984).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
See Fuchs, V., Who Shall Live? Health, Economics and Social Change (Basic Books, New York, 1974).Google Scholar
Reuben, , supra note 3, at 92.Google Scholar
See Katz, J., The Silent World of Doctor and Patient (Free Press, New York, 1984), 165–206.Google Scholar
Cohen, M.L., Letter Response—Uncertainty, Journal of the American Medical Association 251(16):2083 (April 27, 1984); Gutheil, T.G., Bursztajn, H., Brodsky, A., Malpractice Prevention Through the Sharing of Uncertainty: Informed Consent and the Therapeutic Alliance, New England Journal of Medicine 311(1):49–51 (July 5, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bursztajn, , supra note 1, at 37–38.Google Scholar
President's Commission, supra note 2, at 1:86–87.Google Scholar
See Mechanic, D., Physicians, in Handbook of Health, Health Care, and the Health Professions (ed. Mechanic, D.) (Free Press, New York, 1983), 432, 446–47. See generally Reuben, supra note 3.Google Scholar
See Bok, D., Needed: A New Way to Train Doctors, Harvard Magazine 86:32 (May-June 1984).Google Scholar
Volpintesta, E.J., Learning Diagnostic Restraint, New England Journal of Medicine 311(2):130 (July 12, 1984).Google Scholar
Bursztajn, , supra note 1, at 64; see Wiley, J., The Impact of Judicial Decisions on Professional Conduct: An Empirical Study, Southern California Law Review 55(2):345 (January 1982); Reuben, , supra note 3, at 592; see Schwartz, W.M., Komesar, N.K., Doctors, Damages and Deterrence: An Economic View of Medical Malpractice, New England Journal of Medicine 298(23):1282 (June 8, 1978).Google Scholar
Hershey, N., The Defensive Practice of Medicine: Myth or Reality, Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 50(1):69, 72 (January 1972).Google ScholarPubMed
Congress Grapples with Tort Reforms to Cut Medical Malpractice Costs, Medical World News 25(9):49 (May 14, 1984).Google Scholar
Liability Scare Boosts Costs by 25 Percent, American Medical News 27(15):25 (April 20, 1984). See generally Danzon, P., Medical Malpractice: Theory, Evidence, and Public Policy (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1985).Google Scholar
Hershey, , supra note 14, at 75.Google Scholar
Malpractice: More Radical Solutions, Medical World News 26 (March 25, 1985).Google Scholar
King, J.H. Jr., The Law of Medical Malpractice (West Publishing Co., St. Paul, 1977), 324–27; Alton, W.G., Malpractice: A Trial Lawyer's Advice for Physicians (Little, Brown, Boston, 1977), 1–9; see S.F. Piscina, Medical Law for the Attending Physician: A Case-Oriented Analysis (Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Ill., 1982), 68–93.Google Scholar
Bursztajn, , supra note 1, at 169–71.Google Scholar
Caesarean Childbirth: Report of a Consensus Development Conference (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, 1981), 484, 491–97.Google Scholar
Id. at 502.Google Scholar
Id. at 479–506.Google Scholar
Helling v. Carey, 519 P. 2d 981 (Wash. 1974).Google Scholar
Id. at 981, 983.Google Scholar
Id. at 982.Google Scholar
Id. at 983.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Charfoos, , Helling: The Law of Medical Malpractice Rewritten, Ohio Northern Law Review 2:692 (1975); Wechsler, and Classe, , Helling v. Carey: Caveat Medicus (Let the Doctor Beware), Journal of the American Optometrists Association 48:1526 (1977).Google Scholar
Gates v. Jensen, 595 P. 2d 919 (Wash. 1979)Google Scholar
Truman v. Thomas, 611 P. 2d 902 (Cal. 1980)Google Scholar
Peters, B.M., The Application of Reasonable Prudence to Medical Malpractice Litigation: The Precursor to Strict Liability? Law, Medicine & Health Care 9(6):21–24, 45 (December 1981).Google Scholar
See President's Commission, supra note 2, at 3:193–251.Google Scholar
Potchen, E.J., Efficacy Studies in Defensive Medicine, in Legal Medicine with Special Reference to Diagnostic Imaging (ed. James, A.E. Jr.) (Urban & Schwarzenberg, Baltimore, 1980), 353, 358–60.Google Scholar
Wilensky, J.T., Glaucoma: The Scope of the Problem, in Glaucoma: Contemporary International Concepts (ed. Bellows, J.G.) (Masson Publishing USA, New York, 1979) (hereinafter cited as Bellows), at I.Google Scholar
Radnot, M., Follman, P., Diagnosis of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma, in Bellows, supra note 34, at 213, 216.Google Scholar
Bellows, J.G., A Simplified Program for Glaucoma Screening, in Bellows, supra note 34, at 197, 199.Google Scholar
Radnot, and Follman, , supra note 35, at 230.Google Scholar
Helling, supra note 24, at 983.Google Scholar
Ford, V.J., Zimmerman, T.J., Screening for Glaucoma, Annals of Ophthalmology 14(3):209 (March 1982).Google ScholarPubMed
Helling, supra note 24, at 982.Google Scholar
See Schwartz, J.S., Ball, J.H., Mosa, R.H., Safety, Efficacy, and Effectiveness of Clinical Practices: A New Initiative. Annals of Internal Medecine 96(2):246–47 (February 1982).Google ScholarPubMed
Neuhauser, D., Lewicki, A.M., National Health Insurance and the Sixth Stool Guaiac, Policy Analysis 2(1):175–96 (Winter 1976).Google ScholarPubMed
See Ball, J.R., Prospective Payment: Implications for Medical Technology. Annals of Internal Medicine 100(4):606–7 (April 1984).Google ScholarPubMed