While there's much debate about the actual dollar impact of this controversial practice called "defensive medicine," experts agree it's an obstacle to reining in the medical care expenses.
Defensive medicine occurs when a doctor orders tests or procedures not based on need but concern over liability, explained Dr. Alan Woodward, former president of the Massachusetts Medical Society (MMS) and vice chairman of its committee on professional liability.
"If you're serious about (health care) reform, you have to be serious about this issue," Woodward said. He estimates that more than 80% of doctors across the country are engaged in defensive medicine.
President Obama, who has so far made information technology a key to his plan to reform health care, addressed this issue Monday in his speech to the American Medical Association (AMA).
0:00/4:22Geithner: Health care's critical"Some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable. That's a real issue," he said. "While I'm not advocating caps on malpractice awards, I do think we need to explore a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first, let doctors focus on practicing medicine, and encourage broader use of evidence-based guidelines."
"That's how we can scale back the excessive defensive medicine reinforcing our current system of more treatment rather than better care," he said.
A 2008 study from PricewaterhouseCoopers found that wasteful spending in the health system accounts for more than half of all of health care spending. The firm identified defensive medicine as the biggest area of excess.
Pricing fear: Still, the effects of defensive medicine aren't easy to quantify. Estimates vary vastly.
"Each doctor has a very different risk profile," said Dr. David Chin, managing partner of consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers' Global Healthcare Research Institute. "If one doctor asks for an additional test, it's not always because they are practicing defensive medicine."
The Congressional Budget Office, the federal agency that will calculate how much money health reform will cost or save, has estimated that medical malpractice costs -- which include defensive medicine -- amount to less than 2% of overall health care spending.
Chin said his guess is in line with the CBO's number.
Michael Morrisey, a professor of health economics and health insurance at the University of Alabama's Lister Hill Center for Health Policy, is also skeptical about defensive medicine's impact on health care costs. He said states that have capped malpractice claims haven't seen any significant decreases in health care costs or heath insurance premiums.
"To me, the three biggest challenges for health care reform are tax treatment of employer-sponsored insurance, retooling health care payment systems and technological advancement in health care," said Morrisey.
Woodward disagreed. He ranks defensive medicine as the second-biggest burden on health care costs after the fee-for-service model in which doctors are paid for the quantity, rather than the quality, of services provided.
Woodward estimates that defensive medicine accounts for about 10% of health care costs. Some industry studies have translated that to more than $100 billion in health care costs annually.
"We are driving the standard of care more and more in the defensive direction," he said. "Physicians are practicing maximalist medicine rather than optimalist care.
Woodward defines optimalist care as everyone getting high-quality care, when they need it, in a cost-effective way.
He said the uninsured are getting "minimalist" care while insured Americans are getting maximalist care, or more than what they need from doctors due to fear of liability, the fee-for-service payment model and direct-to-consumer advertising.
Consumer impact: Redundant tests can pump up premiums for the insured. "Consumers' premiums could be 10% lower if doctors stopped this practice," Woodward said.
From a medical standpoint, excessive tests can also be harmful to patients if errors or complications occur, said Dr. Manish Sethi, a member of the MMS' board of trustees and co-author of a 2008 study that investigates and quantifies defensive practices in Massachusetts.
The MMS surveyed more than 830 physicians across eight specialty areas in the state and found 83% reported practicing defensive medicine at an estimated cost of $1.4 billion per year.
"The bottom line is doctors across the country are ordering more tests because of liability concerns," said Sethi. "I am not advocating liability reform but we could look at other options."
The American Medical Association, the group representing doctors, last month mentioned "health courts" as one option.
"Let's have special courts for patients just like bankruptcy court or patents courts and judges have medical training," said Woodward. "In the current system, medical cases are heard by judges who may not be trained in health care. Jurors have no background in health care and jury awards are huge."
Sethi offered other ideas such as a national standard of care, enforced by the Department of Health and Human Services, mandating specific clinical practice guidelines for doctors.
Sethi feels this would mitigate some of the liability concerns and encourage more doctors to accept high-risk patients, countering another aspect of defensive medicine.
In Massachusetts, lawmakers are also considering a bill allowing doctors to apologize to patients and their families for a medical error. However, that apology wouldn't be admissible in court during any future lawsuit brought by the patient.
"What a patient wants when errors happen is full disclosure, an apology and assurance that it won't happen again and compensation," said Woodward, adding that this process can help prevent complaints ultimately going to court.
"We have to move from a reactive to a proactive health care system. I think Obama gets it, but I don't know how aggressive he will be about it," he added.
