IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0343807.html

Comparison of accusations against physicians and the practice of defensive medicine between surgical and non-surgical specialties

Author

Listed:
  • Ayat Mahmoud Tawfik
  • Safaa ElZoghby
  • Noura Mahmoud Elsherbiny
  • Marwa Rashad Salem

Abstract

Background: Defensive medicine has two forms: positive (assurance behavior) or negative (avoidance behavior), depending on the clinical situation. Defensive medicine minimizes the risk of litigation and tends to vary between surgical and non-surgical specialties due to the nature of the risks involved and the potential for litigation. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and patterns of defensive medicine practice among Egyptian physicians, compare surgical versus non-surgical specialties, and examine their correlation with medico-legal complaints and occupational determinants. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among physicians from surgical and non-surgical specialties working in different Egyptian hospitals. A self-administered online questionnaire was distributed using the snowball sampling technique. The Defensive Medicine Behavior Scale (DMBS) was used to assess the practice of defensive medicine. Results: A sample of 210 physicians with a mean age of 39 ± 7 years was included; 51.4% held the highest qualification of M.D. or Ph.D., with an equal sex distribution (1:1). There was a high level of defensive medicine practice in both surgical and non-surgical specialties: 41.7% and 39.5%, respectively. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P-value >0.05). Regression analysis showed that working at university hospitals and having workplace insurance coverage for medico-legal claims were associated with fewer positive defensive medicine practices. Conversely, concerns about the financial implications of medico-legal claims and negative reactions from patients or families were associated with a greater prevalence of positive defensive medicine practices. Conclusion: Despite the high prevalence of defensive medicine practices, no statistically significant differences were observed between the surgical and non-surgical groups regarding overall engagement in defensive medicine.

Suggested Citation

  • Ayat Mahmoud Tawfik & Safaa ElZoghby & Noura Mahmoud Elsherbiny & Marwa Rashad Salem, 2026. "Comparison of accusations against physicians and the practice of defensive medicine between surgical and non-surgical specialties," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(3), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0343807
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0343807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0343807
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0343807&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0343807?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Castro, Massimo Finocchiaro & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2019. "Medical malpractice liability and physicians’ behavior: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 646-666.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Guccio, Calogero & Romeo, Domenica, 2025. "Assessing risk attitudes among physicians, medical students, and non-medical students with experimental data," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro & Calogero Guccio & Domenica Romeo, 2024. "Looking inside the lab: a systematic literature review of economic experiments in health service provision," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(7), pages 1177-1204, September.
    3. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2021. "Optimal mixed payment system and medical liability. A laboratory study," MPRA Paper 110276, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Guccio, Calogero & Romeo, Domenica, 2022. "A systematic literature review of 10 years of behavioral research on health services," EconStor Preprints 266248, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    5. Dylan Martin-Lapoirie, 2022. "Teamwork in health care and medical malpractice liability: an experimental investigation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 251-282, October.
    6. Finocchiaro Castro Massimo & Lisi Domenico & Romeo Domenica, 2024. "An Experimental Analysis of Patient Dumping Under Different Payment Systems," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 24(1), pages 205-258, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0343807. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.