American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality · 2026
Malpractice Payments and State Medical Board Discipline: National Evidence From the National Practitioner Data Bank.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Patel Snehal, Tran Quynh, Bettis Tucker, Glosser Logan, Maegawa Felipe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Malpractice payments and state medical board discipline are often assumed to identify the same physicians, yet that assumption has never been tested nationally.
METHODS: National retrospective cohort study using the National Practitioner Data Bank Public Use Data File (March 31, 2026 release). A total of 76 353 allopathic and osteopathic physicians without prior state licensure actions were followed from their first observed paid malpractice report (2004-2018) through March 2026. The primary outcome was any substantive new state licensure action; secondary outcomes classified actions as quality-of-care-related, nonclinical, or severe. All outcomes describe the first subsequent action in a time-to-first-event design.
RESULTS: Overall, 71 372 physicians (93.5%) had no subsequent state licensure action during observed follow-up; a severe first action occurred in 2.1% within 15 years, including license revocation in 0.2%. Among the 4981 physicians (6.5%) with a subsequent action, the first action occurred a median of 5 years after the index report, and 43.7% involved exclusively nonclinical conduct. The 15-year cumulative incidence was 2.54% for quality-of-care actions and 2.94% for nonclinical actions. Severe injury or death in the index report was not associated with subsequent quality-of-care discipline (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.90-1.12).
CONCLUSIONS: Board discipline following a paid malpractice report was uncommon, delayed, and frequently unrelated to clinical care. These accountability systems appear to serve complementary rather than interchangeable roles in assessing physician quality.
METHODS: National retrospective cohort study using the National Practitioner Data Bank Public Use Data File (March 31, 2026 release). A total of 76 353 allopathic and osteopathic physicians without prior state licensure actions were followed from their first observed paid malpractice report (2004-2018) through March 2026. The primary outcome was any substantive new state licensure action; secondary outcomes classified actions as quality-of-care-related, nonclinical, or severe. All outcomes describe the first subsequent action in a time-to-first-event design.
RESULTS: Overall, 71 372 physicians (93.5%) had no subsequent state licensure action during observed follow-up; a severe first action occurred in 2.1% within 15 years, including license revocation in 0.2%. Among the 4981 physicians (6.5%) with a subsequent action, the first action occurred a median of 5 years after the index report, and 43.7% involved exclusively nonclinical conduct. The 15-year cumulative incidence was 2.54% for quality-of-care actions and 2.94% for nonclinical actions. Severe injury or death in the index report was not associated with subsequent quality-of-care discipline (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.90-1.12).
CONCLUSIONS: Board discipline following a paid malpractice report was uncommon, delayed, and frequently unrelated to clinical care. These accountability systems appear to serve complementary rather than interchangeable roles in assessing physician quality.