Mark Cwiek, Dimitrios Zikos, Mark Kato, Mark Taylor
{"title":"向国家执业医师数据库报告的急剧下降,以及 \"原告有利 \"和 \"被告有利 \"州的报告水平。","authors":"Mark Cwiek, Dimitrios Zikos, Mark Kato, Mark Taylor","doi":"10.1080/00185868.2024.2383907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The establishment of the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was authorized in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, and it mandated a federal database to collect information related to adverse actions initially against just physicians and dentists throughout the United States, including payments from malpractice lawsuits, restrictions on clinical privileges by hospitals, and medical licensure limitations and revocations by state licensing boards. The aggregate data reports made by this federal data bank began in 1991. The reporting level for the first ten years remained relatively stable in the nationwide range of 16,000 to 18,000 reports per year, but then a steady decline occurred over the second and third decades to under 8,000 reports per year by the year 2021. The researchers in this study explored a theory that might explain at least part of the drop in the states' reporting levels. That is, states that could be called \"Plaintiff-Favorable\" (Arizona, Kentucky, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington) would demonstrate a lesser rate of decline or even an increase in the reporting levels, and states that could be characterized as \"Defendant-Favorable\" (California, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Texas) would demonstrate a comparatively greater rate of decline in the reporting levels. The decline in reporting to the NPDB proved fairly consistent for both Plaintiff-Favorable and Defendant-Favorable states. The larger question as to why there occurred an overall negative trend in reporting to the NPDB across the United States during the second and third decades remains an intriguing area for future exploration.</p>","PeriodicalId":55886,"journal":{"name":"Hospital Topics","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Steep Decline in Reporting to the National Practioner Data Bank, and a Look at Reporting Levels from \\\"Plaintiff-Favorable\\\" and \\\"Defendant-Favorable\\\" States.\",\"authors\":\"Mark Cwiek, Dimitrios Zikos, Mark Kato, Mark Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00185868.2024.2383907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The establishment of the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was authorized in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, and it mandated a federal database to collect information related to adverse actions initially against just physicians and dentists throughout the United States, including payments from malpractice lawsuits, restrictions on clinical privileges by hospitals, and medical licensure limitations and revocations by state licensing boards. The aggregate data reports made by this federal data bank began in 1991. The reporting level for the first ten years remained relatively stable in the nationwide range of 16,000 to 18,000 reports per year, but then a steady decline occurred over the second and third decades to under 8,000 reports per year by the year 2021. The researchers in this study explored a theory that might explain at least part of the drop in the states' reporting levels. That is, states that could be called \\\"Plaintiff-Favorable\\\" (Arizona, Kentucky, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington) would demonstrate a lesser rate of decline or even an increase in the reporting levels, and states that could be characterized as \\\"Defendant-Favorable\\\" (California, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Texas) would demonstrate a comparatively greater rate of decline in the reporting levels. The decline in reporting to the NPDB proved fairly consistent for both Plaintiff-Favorable and Defendant-Favorable states. The larger question as to why there occurred an overall negative trend in reporting to the NPDB across the United States during the second and third decades remains an intriguing area for future exploration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hospital Topics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hospital Topics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00185868.2024.2383907\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital Topics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00185868.2024.2383907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Steep Decline in Reporting to the National Practioner Data Bank, and a Look at Reporting Levels from "Plaintiff-Favorable" and "Defendant-Favorable" States.
The establishment of the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was authorized in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, and it mandated a federal database to collect information related to adverse actions initially against just physicians and dentists throughout the United States, including payments from malpractice lawsuits, restrictions on clinical privileges by hospitals, and medical licensure limitations and revocations by state licensing boards. The aggregate data reports made by this federal data bank began in 1991. The reporting level for the first ten years remained relatively stable in the nationwide range of 16,000 to 18,000 reports per year, but then a steady decline occurred over the second and third decades to under 8,000 reports per year by the year 2021. The researchers in this study explored a theory that might explain at least part of the drop in the states' reporting levels. That is, states that could be called "Plaintiff-Favorable" (Arizona, Kentucky, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington) would demonstrate a lesser rate of decline or even an increase in the reporting levels, and states that could be characterized as "Defendant-Favorable" (California, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Texas) would demonstrate a comparatively greater rate of decline in the reporting levels. The decline in reporting to the NPDB proved fairly consistent for both Plaintiff-Favorable and Defendant-Favorable states. The larger question as to why there occurred an overall negative trend in reporting to the NPDB across the United States during the second and third decades remains an intriguing area for future exploration.
期刊介绍:
Hospital Topics is the longest continuously published healthcare journal in the United States. Since 1922, Hospital Topics has provided healthcare professionals with research they can apply to improve the quality of access, management, and delivery of healthcare. Dedicated to those who bring healthcare to the public, Hospital Topics spans the whole spectrum of healthcare issues including, but not limited to information systems, fatigue management, medication errors, nursing compensation, midwifery, job satisfaction among managers, team building, and bringing primary care to rural areas. Through articles on theory, applied research, and practice, Hospital Topics addresses the central concerns of today"s healthcare professional and leader.