The use of experts in medical malpractice litigation in Japan

Noriko Sakamoto, Shoichi Maeda, Noriaki Ikeda, Hiromi Ishibashi, Koichi Nobutomo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In medical malpractice litigation, the cooperation of medical experts is important. However, the appointment of experts has become problematic in Japan, apparently because many medical experts refuse to act in this capacity. However, this supposition has not until now been supported by quantitative evidence, since the fact that so few judgments in Japan are published made it impossible to investigate the situation. Therefore, we aim to show the state of the use of experts in medical malpractice litigation using objective data. Over the last ten years, the rate of the use of experts has averaged only 22.5%, varying according to region. Experts were used in 24.5% of cases involving an attorney on the patient's side, and in only 3.4% of cases where no attorney was used. The success rate of patients was higher when experts were adopted (39.1%) than when they were not (29.9%). The length of litigation involving experts was 4.0 years, and 2.7 years when no expert was involved. This research suggested the necessity of establishing a formal cooperation system as soon as possible in Japan with no regional maldistribution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)200-206
Number of pages7
JournalMedicine, Science and the Law
Volume42
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2002

Fingerprint

Malpractice
Jurisprudence
Japan
Lawyers
expert
Appointments and Schedules
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Health Policy
  • Law

Cite this

The use of experts in medical malpractice litigation in Japan. / Sakamoto, Noriko; Maeda, Shoichi; Ikeda, Noriaki; Ishibashi, Hiromi; Nobutomo, Koichi.

In: Medicine, Science and the Law, Vol. 42, No. 3, 01.01.2002, p. 200-206.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sakamoto, Noriko ; Maeda, Shoichi ; Ikeda, Noriaki ; Ishibashi, Hiromi ; Nobutomo, Koichi. / The use of experts in medical malpractice litigation in Japan. In: Medicine, Science and the Law. 2002 ; Vol. 42, No. 3. pp. 200-206.
@article{f2cf3bc90f964fb695bfbe6f4c1c9aa5,
title = "The use of experts in medical malpractice litigation in Japan",
abstract = "In medical malpractice litigation, the cooperation of medical experts is important. However, the appointment of experts has become problematic in Japan, apparently because many medical experts refuse to act in this capacity. However, this supposition has not until now been supported by quantitative evidence, since the fact that so few judgments in Japan are published made it impossible to investigate the situation. Therefore, we aim to show the state of the use of experts in medical malpractice litigation using objective data. Over the last ten years, the rate of the use of experts has averaged only 22.5{\%}, varying according to region. Experts were used in 24.5{\%} of cases involving an attorney on the patient's side, and in only 3.4{\%} of cases where no attorney was used. The success rate of patients was higher when experts were adopted (39.1{\%}) than when they were not (29.9{\%}). The length of litigation involving experts was 4.0 years, and 2.7 years when no expert was involved. This research suggested the necessity of establishing a formal cooperation system as soon as possible in Japan with no regional maldistribution.",
author = "Noriko Sakamoto and Shoichi Maeda and Noriaki Ikeda and Hiromi Ishibashi and Koichi Nobutomo",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/002580240204200304",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "200--206",
journal = "Medicine, Science and the Law",
issn = "0025-8024",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The use of experts in medical malpractice litigation in Japan

AU - Sakamoto, Noriko

AU - Maeda, Shoichi

AU - Ikeda, Noriaki

AU - Ishibashi, Hiromi

AU - Nobutomo, Koichi

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - In medical malpractice litigation, the cooperation of medical experts is important. However, the appointment of experts has become problematic in Japan, apparently because many medical experts refuse to act in this capacity. However, this supposition has not until now been supported by quantitative evidence, since the fact that so few judgments in Japan are published made it impossible to investigate the situation. Therefore, we aim to show the state of the use of experts in medical malpractice litigation using objective data. Over the last ten years, the rate of the use of experts has averaged only 22.5%, varying according to region. Experts were used in 24.5% of cases involving an attorney on the patient's side, and in only 3.4% of cases where no attorney was used. The success rate of patients was higher when experts were adopted (39.1%) than when they were not (29.9%). The length of litigation involving experts was 4.0 years, and 2.7 years when no expert was involved. This research suggested the necessity of establishing a formal cooperation system as soon as possible in Japan with no regional maldistribution.

AB - In medical malpractice litigation, the cooperation of medical experts is important. However, the appointment of experts has become problematic in Japan, apparently because many medical experts refuse to act in this capacity. However, this supposition has not until now been supported by quantitative evidence, since the fact that so few judgments in Japan are published made it impossible to investigate the situation. Therefore, we aim to show the state of the use of experts in medical malpractice litigation using objective data. Over the last ten years, the rate of the use of experts has averaged only 22.5%, varying according to region. Experts were used in 24.5% of cases involving an attorney on the patient's side, and in only 3.4% of cases where no attorney was used. The success rate of patients was higher when experts were adopted (39.1%) than when they were not (29.9%). The length of litigation involving experts was 4.0 years, and 2.7 years when no expert was involved. This research suggested the necessity of establishing a formal cooperation system as soon as possible in Japan with no regional maldistribution.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036637396&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036637396&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/002580240204200304

DO - 10.1177/002580240204200304

M3 - Article

C2 - 12201065

AN - SCOPUS:0036637396

VL - 42

SP - 200

EP - 206

JO - Medicine, Science and the Law

JF - Medicine, Science and the Law

SN - 0025-8024

IS - 3

ER -