Board agrees to post some malpractice details

RALEIGH -- The N.C. Medical Board voted today to scale back some of the information that will be published on its Web site about settlements doctors make in medical malpractice lawsuits.

The board decided it will only post settlements of more than $25,000 — a threshold amount that can trigger an increase in malpractice insurance premiums for doctors.

In addition, the board scaled back the number of years it would initially publish the malpractice data. Rather than immediately show a seven-year history, it will start the profiles at October 2007, when the state legislature made the rule effective.

The timeframe for posting the malpractice awards has been one of the biggest sticking points. Doctors and their lawyers argue that malpractice payments are often made with secrecy clauses that are agreed to by both parties and are contractually binding. By posting data from the past, they contend, those agreements could be breached. Some have threatend litigation over the matter, but no formal lawsuit has been filed.

It's unclear whether the board's compromise will defuse opposition. An official with the N.C. Medical Society, the doctors' lobbying organization that has opposed many of the board's proposals, said there was still concern that even the scaled-back retrospective data would be troublesome.

"It's vulnerable to a legal challenge," said Stephen Keene, the medical society's general counsel.

More than 20 states already publish medical malpractice information, and the North Carolina board won legislative approval to add the information to its Web page last year. The information won't be posted in North Carolina until the fall of 2009.

Doctors, led by the Medical Society, want less information made available. They contend the public might misconstrue a medical malpractice settlement as an admission of poor care or negligence.

A recent public hearing at the medical board's Raleigh headquarters drew 32 speakers, most of whom wanted to limit the malpractice information. The opponents included doctors, hospital administrators, insurance company representatives and lawyers who defend doctors against malpractice lawsuits.

The medical board, however, conducted a public poll that showed a vast majority of respondents — 81 percent — support full disclosure of medical malpractice payments. In addition, 84 percent said they would like the information to show the past seven years of data.

The polling company, Public Policy Polling, concluded that "North Carolinians are extremely favorable to the idea of having easy access to the malpractice records of their medical practitioners. Almost all adults in the state want this website to be made available with seven years of archived information from the beginning, and most of them want all cases posted regardless of settlement cost or finding of substandard care."