The medical malpractice insurance "crises" and federal medical malpractice tort reform: Collection and analysis of bills passed by the United States House of Representatives from 1995--2005

There have been three medical malpractice insurance "crises" in the United States over a time spanning roughly the past three decades (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Each crisis is characterized by a number of common features, including rapidly increasing medical malpractice insurance premiums, cancellation of existing insurance policies, and a decreased willingness of insurers to offer or renew medical malpractice insurance policies (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Given the recurrent "crises," many sources argue that medical malpractice insurance coverage has become too expensive a commodity—one that many physicians simply cannot afford (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 2002, p. 1-2; Physician Insurers Association of America [PIAA], 2003, p. 1; Jackiw, 2004, p. 506; Glassman, 2004, p. 417; Padget, 2003, p. 216). ^ The prohibitively high cost of medical liability insurance is said to limit the geographical areas and medical specializations in which physicians are willing to practice. As a result, the high costs of medical liability insurance are ultimately said to affect whether or not people have access to health care services. ^ In an effort to control the medical liability insurance crises—and to preserve or restore peoples' access to health care—every state in the United States has passed "at least some laws designed to reduce medical malpractice premium rates" (GAO, 2003, p.5-6). More recently, however, the United States has witnessed a push to implement federal reform of the medical malpractice tort system. Accordingly, this project focuses on federal medical malpractice tort reform. This project was designed to investigate the following specific question: Do the federal medical malpractice tort reform bills which passed in the House of Representatives between 1995 and 2005 differ in respect to their principle features? To answer this question, the text of the bills, law review articles, and reports from government and private agencies were analyzed. Further, a matrix was compiled to concisely summarize the principle features of the proposed federal medical malpractice tort reform bills. Insight gleaned from this investigation and matrix compilation informs discussion about the potential ramifications of enacting federal medical malpractice tort reform legislation. ^

Prognostic factors in desmoid tumors

Purpose. To evaluate the prognostic factors in desmoid tumors in the light of its possible use in standardizing the treatment strategy of an individual patient. ^ Patients and methods. A retrospective review of 189 consecutive patients who were treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) from January 1995 to December 2005 was done. Univariate and multivariate analysis of different prognostic factors was done on all patients, patients treated with surgery alone, subset of patients who came to MDACC with primary tumor. The median follow up was 63 months. Also the analysis of 189 desmoid patients treated at MDACC between 1995 and 2005 was compared to results of 189 desmoid patients treated at MDACC from 1965-1994 using data retrieved from a 150 field prospective relational soft tissue tumor database. ^ Results. 5-, and 10-year overall survival rate were 0.976 (95%CI 0.952, 0.999), and 0.966 (95% CI 0.935, 0.996), respectively. 5-, and 10-year recurrence free rate were 0.803 (95%CI 0.738, 0.868), and 0.793 (95% CI 0.726, 0.860), respectively. 5 year recurrence free survival for surgery alone, radiotherapy alone, chemotherapy alone and combination regimen were 0.759, 0.625, 0.933, and 0.802 respectively. Age (>30 vs. <=30) and primary tumor site (extremity vs visceral) were two prognostic factors significantly associated with local recurrence in all of the patients. ^ Conclusion. An increased awareness of the complex multidisciplinary management needed for successful control of desmoid tumor may underlie a significantly increased number of desmoid referrals, especially primary untreated desmoids, to UTMDACC. The careful prospective integration of multiple therapies has led to a significant recent improvement in desmoid patient outcome. These trends should be supported, particularly if personalized molecular-based therapies are to be rapidly and effectively deployed for the benefit of those afflicted by this rare and potentially devastating disease.^