Comments on: Sorry, doc, your personality is uninsurable

By: AMcAMcA

AMcAMcA — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:52:25 +0000

I recall there is in fact evidence that shows more communicative doctors get fewer malpractice suits.

And think about it, it makes sense. Bad outcomes are inevitable in medicine. Helping a patient though better communication to understand that, and to understand why an outcome was bad results in a more satisfied — even if not cured — patient. And that’s better medicine. This is not a matter of an irrational response to an irrational system. It’s better medicine.

By: Melvin

Melvin — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:06:52 +0000

Seems there's a two-digit number that would also do the same thing . . . 11, as in Rule 11.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:46:02 +0000

“And, since it is never about the money, such fault can only be redressed with seven figure numbers.”

That’s simply not true… there are also 8-digit and 9-digit numbers that can redress the fault as well.

And Bumper scores it right, of course.

By: wavemaker

wavemaker — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:35:51 +0000

I would hope that this personality test goes further than manners. I know a doctor or two whose psychoses confine them to the lab and well outof the patient’s way.

By: Supremacy Claus

Supremacy Claus — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:42:57 +0000

We know docs are good test takers.

Any doc with a bad score on this test? Stoned, not disruptive.

By: ras

ras — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:15:38 +0000

FWIW, An interesting discussion of the relationship between a doc’s bedside manner and his (or hers etc) chances of being sued was in Gladwell’s “Blink” bestseller. Here it is, as best as I recall it:

Docs were rated on bedside manner in various ways. Yup, the arrogant ones (as rated by observers) were sued the most.

Even more interesting, tapes were played of the docs in conversation w/with their patients, with the audio fuzzed so that tone of voice, but not the words, could be made out.

Same results. Likeable docs were simply not getting sued, even if that meant that the patient had to sue someone more farfetched instead.

In the words of one malpractice lawyer, her clients simply refused to sue a doc that they liked.

By: MHoc

MHoc — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:13:51 +0000

From the insurance co point of view it’s all about risk exposure. It’s irrelevant that quality medical care is provided if there is some other factor also correlated with risk. Actuaries can’t quantify “quality of care” quite as easily as they can the scores on a personality test.

By: John N.

John N. — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:07:36 +0000

Mike, people tend to be forgiving, but their lawyers like to point to their expressions of regret, sorrow, or dismay as admissions of fault. And, since it is never about the money, such fault can only be redressed with seven figure numbers.

By: Bumper

Bumper — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:48:39 +0000

And the first request from the plaintiff’s lawyer will be for the doctor’s test scores and counseling records. This is going to play well at the trial.

By: jb

jb — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:37:19 +0000

Mike’s right that this is a rational response; it is, however, a rational response to irrational conditions. Of course better bedside manner will result in more favorable patient opinions; the problem is that unfavorable patient opinions translate into far more $xx million suits than they should.