You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 127 No. 6, June 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Law and Medicine
 •Pediatric Ophthalmology
 •Retinal/ Chorioretinal Disorders
 •Pediatrics
 •Neonatology and Infant Care
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Retinopathy of Prematurity Malpractice Claims

Monte D. Mills, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(6):803-804.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

It is not an exaggeration to describe the current practice environment for ophthalmologists caring for neonates at risk for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) as a crisis; there are increasing liability claims and judgments against ophthalmologists for ROP and a worsening scarcity of ophthalmologists willing to treat ROP. Newspaper headlines and academic journals document the record malpractice judgments related to ROP. Although there is no evidence that blindness from ROP is increasing in the United States, Day et al1 describe the experience of one ophthalmic malpractice insurance provider, showing a disproportionately high number of claims and large indemnity judgments related to ROP.

Simultaneously, ophthalmologists are choosing to avoid caring for patients with ROP, and neonatologists are having difficulty finding ophthalmologists to care for their patients.2

Are these 2 trends related? The obvious answer, both from standard economics theory and responses of the ophthalmologists themselves,2 is yes; ophthalmologists . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Retinopathy of Prematurity Malpractice Claims: The Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company Experience
Shelley Day, Anne M. Menke, and Richard L. Abbott
Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(6):794-798.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.