Studio della funzionalità respiratoria in soggetti con sindrome di Turner

The aim of this study is to evaluate the pulmonary function in subjects with diagnosis of Turner Syndrome, in charge at the Syndromology Ward of the Paediatric Clinic of S.Orsola-Malpighi hospital. There are very few datas about lung function in patients with Turner syndrome’s genotype and phenotype in medical literature. Since the thorax of these subjects have peculiar anatomic shape (as “shield” or “overturned triangle”), we presupposed that these subjects could have also a peculiar respiratory function. Moreover we look for the possibility of correlation between pulmonary function and estroprogestinic replacement therapy and/or growth hormone (GH) replacement therapy. Material and methods: we studied 48 patients, with diagnosis of Turner Syndrome; they all made spirometry voluntarily and, when capable, also plethismografy. Results: - the parametres of pulmonary function are a little higher of the predicted values for age and sex but they are a little lower if they're corrected for each patient’s ideal high and weight: so we can conclude that in Turner Syndrme subjects pulmonary function is normal; -there’s not a statistically significant correlation between pulmonary function and GH therapy; -there’s not a statistically significant correlation between GH therapy’s length and pulmonary function except for Total Lung Capacity which increases with the number of years of GH therapy; - there’s not a statistically significant correlation between pulmonary function and estroprogestinic replacement herapy.

Biomedicine and pain

The focus of my research is on contemporary biomedical construction of pain as an object, i.e. the different ways in which pain has been conceptualized and approached as a specific site of investigation in biomedicine. A significant shift in the scientific conception of pain occured in the second half of XXth century. In 1965, Ronald Melzack and Patrick D. Wall propose the Gate Control theory of pain mechanism. This theory denies a fixed and direct relationship between stimulus and pain perception, and emphazises the role played by psychological factors in pain. The IASP utilizes this perspective on the phenomenon, describing pain as “an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated to an actual or potential tissue damage or described in the terms of such a damage.” The relationship between pain and damage is pivotal in the definition of pain as a pathological entity. In particular, the biomedical approach to pain appears to be strongly characterized by a dualistic view of its aetiology. Disease conceptions such as “psychogenic pain” and chronic pain are deeply influenced by the ways in which psychological factors have been interpreted as components, or as causes of pain. In the second part of my dissertation, I focus on fibromyalgia, which is emblematic of the problematic acknowledgment of chronic pain as a disease. Even if fibromyalgia is actually treated in Rheumatology, its status as a disease is blurred, mainly because of its complex symptomatology including both physiological manifestations and psychological ones. In the conclusion, I present a scenario of the different ways in which this disease is dealt with in biomedical knowledge, through medical literature, clinical practice, and patients’ accounts. The findings of an ethnographic enquiry in the Rheumatology Division of a local clinic and a visual research on patients’ experiences are analyzed and discussed.

Quantifying the Economics of Medical Malpractice - A View from a Civil Law Perspective

Life is full of uncertainties. Legal rules should have a clear intention, motivation and purpose in order to diminish daily uncertainties. However, practice shows that their consequences are complex and hard to predict. For instance, tort law has the general objectives of deterring future negligent behavior and compensating the victims of someone else's negligence. Achieving these goals are particularly difficult in medical malpractice cases. To start with, when patients search for medical care they are typically sick in the first place. In case harm materializes during the treatment, it might be very hard to assess if it was due to substandard medical care or to the patient's poor health conditions. Moreover, the practice of medicine has a positive externality on the society, meaning that the design of legal rules is crucial: for instance, it should not result in physicians avoiding practicing their activity just because they are afraid of being sued even when they acted according to the standard level of care. The empirical literature on medical malpractice has been developing substantially in the past two decades, with the American case being the most studied one. Evidence from civil law tradition countries is more difficult to find. The aim of this thesis is to contribute to the empirical literature on medical malpractice, using two civil law countries as a case-study: Spain and Italy. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, in the first place, some of the consequences of having two separate sub-systems (administrative and civil) coexisting within the same legal system, which is common in civil law tradition countries with a public national health system (such as Spain, France and Portugal). When this holds, different procedures might apply depending on the type of hospital where the injury took place (essentially whether it is a public hospital or a private hospital). Therefore, a patient injured in a public hospital should file a claim in administrative courts while a patient suffering an identical medical accident should file a claim in civil courts. A natural question that the reader might pose is why should both administrative and civil courts decide medical malpractice cases? Moreover, can this specialization of courts influence how judges decide medical malpractice cases? In the past few years, there was a general concern with patient safety, which is currently on the agenda of several national governments. Some initiatives have been taken at the international level, with the aim of preventing harm to patients during treatment and care. A negligently injured patient might present a claim against the health care provider with the aim of being compensated for the economic loss and for pain and suffering. In several European countries, health care is mainly provided by a public national health system, which means that if a patient harmed in a public hospital succeeds in a claim against the hospital, public expenditures increase because the State takes part in the litigation process. This poses a problem in a context of increasing national health expenditures and public debt. In Italy, with the aim of increasing patient safety, some regions implemented a monitoring system on medical malpractice claims. However, if properly implemented, this reform shall also allow for a reduction in medical malpractice insurance costs. This thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 1 provides a review of the empirical literature on medical malpractice, where studies on outcomes and merit of claims, costs and defensive medicine are presented. Chapter 2 presents an empirical analysis of medical malpractice claims arriving to the Spanish Supreme Court. The focus is on reversal rates for civil and administrative decisions. Administrative decisions appealed by the plaintiff have the highest reversal rates. The results show a bias in lower administrative courts, which tend to focus on the State side. We provide a detailed explanation for these results, which can rely on the organization of administrative judges career. Chapter 3 assesses predictors of compensation in medical malpractice cases appealed to the Spanish Supreme Court and investigates the amount of damages attributed to patients. The results show horizontal equity between administrative and civil decisions (controlling for observable case characteristics) and vertical inequity (patients suffering more severe injuries tend to receive higher payouts). In order to execute these analyses, a database of medical malpractice decisions appealed to the Administrative and Civil Chambers of the Spanish Supreme Court from 2006 until 2009 (designated by the Spanish Supreme Court Medical Malpractice Dataset (SSCMMD)) has been created. A description of how the SSCMMD was built and of the Spanish legal system is presented as well. Chapter 4 includes an empirical investigation of the effect of a monitoring system for medical malpractice claims on insurance premiums. In Italy, some regions adopted this policy in different years, while others did not. The study uses data on insurance premiums from Italian public hospitals for the years 2001-2008. This is a significant difference as most of the studies use the insurance company as unit of analysis. Although insurance premiums have risen from 2001 to 2008, the increase was lower for regions adopting a monitoring system for medical claims. Possible implications of this system are also provided. Finally, Chapter 5 discusses the main findings, describes possible future research and concludes.

Medical Malpractice in Public Healthcare Systems: An Empirical Investigation of Scheduled Damages

In the last decades, medical malpractice has been framed as one of the most critical issues for healthcare providers and health policy, holding a central role on both the policy agenda and public debate. The Law and Economics literature has devoted much attention to medical malpractice and to the investigation of the impact of malpractice reforms. Nonetheless, some reforms have been much less empirically studied as in the case of schedules, and their effects remain highly debated. The present work seeks to contribute to the study of medical malpractice and of schedules of noneconomic damages in a civil law country with a public national health system, using Italy as case study. Besides considering schedules and exploiting a quasi-experimental setting, the novelty of our contribution consists in the inclusion of the performance of the judiciary (measured as courts’ civil backlog) in the empirical analysis. The empirical analysis is twofold. First, it investigates how limiting compensations for pain and suffering through schedules impacts on the malpractice insurance market in terms of presence of private insurers and of premiums applied. Second, it examines whether, and to what extent, healthcare providers react to the implementation of this policy in terms of both levels and composition of the medical treatments offered. Our findings show that the introduction of schedules increases the presence of insurers only in inefficient courts, while it does not produce significant effects on paid premiums. Judicial inefficiency is attractive to insurers for average values of schedules penetration of the market, with an increasing positive impact of inefficiency as the territorial coverage of schedules increases. Moreover, the implementation of schedules tends to reduce the use of defensive practices on the part of clinicians, but the magnitude of this impact is ultimately determined by the actual degree of backlog of the court implementing schedules.