The MDU is warning against using information about clinical negligence claims as a measure of doctors' performance. Placing too much reliance on such information is likely to stigmatise doctors, as information about negligence claims is not a useful indicator of poor performance, the MDU explains in an article in the latest edition of the MDU Journal 1.

A number of bodies and organisations currently require, or are seeking powers to require, the disclosure of information about negligence claims made against doctors.

Dr Karen Roberts, MDU medico-legal adviser, said:

"Of course it is in everyone's interest to identify poorly performing doctors as early as possible, in order to prevent harm to patients and so that any problems can be remedied swiftly. But we believe there are better and fairer ways to achieve this than collecting claims data. Concentrating on improving local clinical governance arrangements so that problems are picked up and can be addressed as early as possible would be much more effective.

"Some bodies seem not to understand the purpose of the claims procedure. When a claim is made, the investigation that follows is only aimed at establishing whether and how much compensation should be awarded to the patient, not whether the doctor involved had any performance problems.

"Information about notifications of claims would not be effective as seventy per cent of claims notified by MDU medical members are discontinued and most of the remaining 30 per cent are settled out of court, with no admission of liability. When you also consider that settled claims take, on average, six to eight years from the incident occurring to settlement, it is obvious that gathering data about settled claims doesn't provide an accurate guide to a doctor's current performance either. If there is a problem, you want a reliable way of finding out as early as possible. Claims information will not help with this."

The MDU also points out that the incidence of clinical negligence claims varies according to factors unrelated to clinical competence, such as whether a doctor happens to practise in an area where data shows that patients are more likely to bring claims, for example the north west of England, or in a specialty which sees more claims, such as obstetrics and gynaecology or any other type of surgery.

The MDU is concerned that collecting claims information could have a detrimental effect if doctors are deterred from agreeing to settle a claim. This would not be in patients' interests and may also act as a disincentive to taking on additional activities which are seen as higher risk of claims, such as GPs fitting intrauterine contraceptive devices or performing certain types of minor surgery or choosing not to practise in an area where there are more claims.

1. 'Collecting claims data may stigmatise doctors', MDU Journal, Volume 25 Issue 1, January 2009, pp3-4.

The MDU is a mutual, not for profit, organisation owned by our members who include over 50 per cent of the UK's hospital doctors and GPs. Established in 1885, we were the world's first medical defence organisation. We defend the professional reputations of our members when their clinical performance is called into question. Our benefits of membership include insurance for claims of clinical negligence and a wide range of medico-legal advisory services.

The MDU