Role of ADR in the Healthcare Sector on resolving Medical Malpractice Disputes

A growing portion of healthcare costs is attributed to medical litigation. ADR methods such as arbitration and mediation have become increasingly popular for helping to settle disputes and improve a patient's satisfaction with their healthcare provider. Recent years have seen the establishment in several provinces of Alternative Dispute Resolution processes in response to the growing number of medical disputes and a lack of trust between physicians and patients caused by the increasing number of medical disputes in India. In our study, we examined the role of alternative dispute resolution in resolving medical malpractice disputes in the healthcare sector. Report on recent legislation concerning medical malpractice litigation, including the challenges and successes faced by these ADR programs. In the aftermath of unexpected medical errors, communication is central to conflict resolution. It has been reported that apologizing and disclosing early can reduce litigation costs by 50% to 67% as well as reduce settlements by a significant amount. Approximately 75% to 90% of mediation claims are avoided through mediation, saving $50,000 per claim. 90 percent of parties who participate in mediation are satisfied. Mediation is viewed as more efficient and satisfying, but arbitration is less efficient and more time-consuming than litigation. Several recent court decisions have upheld pretreatment arbitration clauses in the current legal climate, which is favorable to ADR. National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) reporting requirements are the primary obstacle to ADR. As a result of ADR, the current tort system may be reformed in a way that reduces costs and increases satisfaction for both parties. Providing physicians with easier reporting requirements would enable ADR to be accepted more widely.