Inequality in the last resort: how medical appraisal affects malpractice litigations in China.

Abstract

Medical malpractice litigations affect the practices of patient safety. However, medical malpractice litigations involve highly specialized knowledge. Thus, medical appraisal is usually essential in the ascertainment of responsibility and judicial decision-making. China's judicial system is characterized by a dual-mode of medical appraisal resulting from two parallel appraisal agencies: judicial appraisal institutions and medical associations. This paper examines whether or not and how choices of different medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice lawsuit results in China. We collected and sampled a total of 2557 verdicts pertaining to medical disputes from "China Judgements Online" in 2014. We used an ordinary least square regression model and a mediating effect regression model to analyze to what extent and how different choices between two medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice litigations. (1) Almost 81.55% (2082) of litigants resorted to medical malpractice appraisals in China in 2014. Among 2070 cases with appraisal results accepted by the court, 60.10% of the litigants chose judicial appraisal institutions (1244), as opposed to medical associations (826). (2) Among 2557 cases, 2306 (90.18%) claimed compensation and 1919 (83.22%) were awarded compensation by the courts. The proportion of compensation paid in a case is 48% on average. (3) Appraisal agencies matter in the investigation of medical errors, which in turn affects the proportion of compensation paid in a case. (4) Choosing judicial appraisal institutions will raise the proportion of compensation paid by about 10% on average. Different choices between appraisal institutions affect malpractice litigations in China. As the last resort for remedying medical malpractice, medical appraisals in the judicial system could be a source of inequality in China's medical litigation outcomes.