States have engaged in medical malpractice litigation reforms over the past 30 years to reduce malpractice insurance premiums, increase the supply of physicians, reduce the cost of healthcare, and increase efficiency. These reforms have included caps on non-economic damages and legal procedural changes. Despite these reforms, healthcare costs in the U.S. remain among the highest in the world, provider shortages remain, and defensive medicine practices persist. The purpose of this study was to determine how successful traditional medical malpractice reforms have been at controlling medical costs, decreasing defensive medicine practices, lowering malpractice premiums, and reducing the frequency of medical malpractice litigation. Research has shown that direct reforms and aggressive damage caps has had the most significant impact on lowering malpractice premiums and increasing physician supply. Out of the metrics which were improved by malpractice reforms, similar improvements were shown because of quality reform measures. While traditional tort reforms have shown some targeted improvement, large scale, system-wide change has not been realized, and thus it is time to consider alternative reforms.
Gerlach, J., Abodunde, B., Sollosy, M., & Coustasse, A. (2019). Rethinking the Obvious: Time for New Ideas on Medical Malpractice Tort Reform. The Health Care Manager, 38(2), 109-115.