Cited by 41Medical Malpractice and Liability IssuesHealthcare cost, quality, practicesRadiology practices and education

Malpractice Liability Risk and Use of Diagnostic Imaging Services: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Li, Suhui, Brantley, Erin·2015·Journal of the American College of Radiology

Abstract

Purpose A widespread concern among physicians is that fear of medical malpractice liability may affect their decisions for diagnostic imaging orders. The purpose of this article is to synthesize evidence regarding the defensive use of imaging services. Methods A literature search was conducted using a number of databases. The review included peer-reviewed publications that studied the link between physician orders of imaging tests and malpractice liability pressure. Results We identified 13 peer-reviewed studies conducted in the United States. Five of the studies reported physician assessments of the role of defensive medicine in imaging-order decisions; five assessed the association between physicians' liability risk and imaging ordering, and three assessed the impact of liability risk on imaging ordering at the state level. Although the belief that medical liability risk could influence decisions is highly prevalent among physicians, findings are mixed regarding the impact of liability risk on imaging orders at both the state and physician level. Conclusions Inconclusive evidence suggests that physician ordering of imaging tests is affected by malpractice liability risk. Further research is needed to disentangle defensive medicine from other reasons for inefficient use of imaging.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.09.015

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinicians' decision making can be greatly impacted by the potential medical liability risk, which often leads to selecting defensive practices, such as ordering unnecessary tests and referrals, that are perceived as mitigating malpractice claim risk instead of clinically necessary actions to avoid legal issues.

    “Clinicians’ decision making can be greatly impacted by the potential medical liability risk, which often leads to selecting defensive practices, such as ordering unnecessary tests and referrals, that are perceived as mitigating malpractice claim risk instead of clinically necessary actions to avoid legal issues [262,263,264].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, S., & Brantley, E.
Affiliations
George Washington University (US)
Corresponding author
Li, Suhui
Venue
Journal of the American College of Radiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-12
Volume
12
Issue
12
Pages
1403-1412
ISSN
1546-1440 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2181289271
Cited by
41
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
Keywords
defensive medicine, medical malpractice liability, diagnostic imaging, physician behavior, liability risk, overuse of imaging
MeSH terms
Diagnostic Imaging, Malpractice, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Radiology, Referral and Consultation, United States, Utilization Review, Liability, Legal, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review