In this paper two main medicalmalpractice systems are discussed - tort liability system inthe US and no-fault system adopted in OECD countries- mostnotably in Sweden. These systems were discussed fromadministrative issues, deterrence, financing,compensation,costs occur to parties involved in malpractice cases,quality of care and finally their impact on health carecosts. Tort liability system is a “social insurance of amarket society” where patients are compensated when thenegligence is proved to be the cause of the injury, whereasno-fault system is a “social insurance of goodwill” wherethe patients are compensated without proof of providers’fault. Tort litigation system has been criticized for beinginefficient, unfair, and costly to both patients, healthcare providers and to health care system. No-fault system isintroduced as an alternative totort system and adopted bymany developed OECD countries. Although the system is moreefficient and less costly for providing compensation topatients, it limits the patient’s right to appeal, and itappears that there is a trade-off between deterrence and thelower litigation costs. In order to overcome problemsassociated with the tort litigation system, several methodsare suggested as an alternative current tort system in theUS. These methods are discussed briefly at the end of thepaper to provide information on different methods so thatthe countries who are in a process of planning to set amedical malpractice system could tailor some of suggestedmethods to their needs. There is no perfect medicalmalpractice system when the costs of litigation, deterrence,quality of care, financing, and fairness of compensation areconsidered simultaneously. Therefore, countries should adoptmedical malpractice system by tailoring their functions tothe conditions and the needs of the country.
PDF
download
878987797
028-85220240
