51% vs 49%

51% vs 49%

51% vs 49%

0

It only takes one grain to tip the scale

As a treating Physician,  Spine Surgeon,  and a Medical Expert,  I am often asked to offer analysis on certain medical situations.

I write letters,  and sign forms regarding return to work, work restrictions,  temporary disabled parking permits,  the need for additional medications,  and therapy.  I am often asked to justify my reason for the letter.

For people who are injured in accidents and falls,  I am asked to analyze  the cause of their injuries,  the need for treatments,  and the permanent nature of their injuries. From a legal perspective,  I am giving expert opinion.  

When I am asked to make the Expert analysis,  these conclusions are used by our legal system to determine settlement, or compensation for the pain,  disability,  and treatment costs associated the injury.

Causation analysis can change based on information not provided at the time of the initial analysis.

Since the Expert analysis is often challenged by both sides of the dispute,  the analysis must be based on the specific factors of the situation.  That means considering the information evident at the time of the analysis.  That information typically includes:

1. Mechanism for how the injury occurred

2. Timing of the presentation of the complaints

3.  Utilization of evidence based medical treatment protocols

4. Identification of measurable findings on testing

5. Correlation of the subjective complaints to the objective findings

6. Reviewing prior medical history for similar complaints

7. Reviewing the prior medical history to rule out medical co morbidity causes of the complaints

8. Evaluating the treatment protocols as compared to the community standard.

In the end,  the conclusion of the analysis also must meet the standard of “more likely than not“.  The other terms often used is “within a reasonable degree of medical probability“.  In the end,  it means there is more than a 51% chance that the conclusion is correct.   If it is 49%,  then the analysis will conclude differently.

Fortunately,  when I make my Expert analysis, the conclusion probability is usually a much greater percentage that 51%.  Still,  most folks need to understand that opinions by Medical Experts are held to this standard.  As the analysis probability comes closer to 51%,  disagreement of the analysis is typical.  Yet,  as the scale above shows,  one more grain can be the difference.  

For many treating Physicians, and Surgeons,  this definition of “within a reasonable degree of medical probability” causes much angst when making these statements.  To give an example, as a treating spine surgeon,  I am most concerned about any possibility of a poor surgical outcome.  A 20% chance of a bad outcome is a definite concern.  Yet,  when offering Expert opinions based on the “more likely than not” standard ,  the possibility of the poor outcome does not pass the threshold of 51%.  The opinion will be a “poor outcome is not likely”,  and sometimes,  the opinion will also be “the poor outcome will be unlikely”.  To say “with a reasonable degree of medical probability,  the outcome will be acceptable” is also a proper statement.

For my patients,  if you are involved in a legal matter,  please provide all your information so I can make the proper analysis. As your treating Physician,  I would like to present all the relevant information so I can also make analysis that will be considered Expert Opinion.   Depending on if it is 51% or 49%,  I will need to make a different statement.

It is similar to an election.   51% becomes the more likely conclusion.  51% is the “winning” conclusion. 

As a surgeon, I will always do what is in the patient’s best clinical interest.    When I offer expert analysis about legal disputes such as causation, and future care, etc.,  it will be based on the situation and evidence based medical science.  The analysis will be made based on what is more likely.   Sometimes,  the analysis may not capture the nuanced nature of the problem.  That is because treating Physicians look at situations from a perspective of what is possible  ( even a 10% chance of a bad surgical outcome is a very real concern),  not just what is likely.   The treating Physician perspective differs from the standard set by the legal system regarding expert opinion.

Citations

  • Kahn CA, Cisneros V, Lotfipour S, Imani G, Chakravarthy B. Distracted Driving, A Major Preventable Cause of Motor Vehicle Collisions: "Just Hang Up and Drive". West J Emerg Med. 2015 Dec;16(7):1033-6. PubMed PMID: 26759649

No comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*
*

Disclosure Statement

The information provided on this website does not provide or should be considered medical advice. It is not a substitute for diagnosis or treatment of any condition. The information provided is for informational purposes only. You should not rely solely on the information provided on this website in making a decision to pursue a specific treatment or advice. You should consult directly with a professional healthcare provider.

As a condition of using the information on this website, ShimSpine and its physicians are not responsible for any advice, diagnosis, treatment or outcome you may obtain.

ShimSpine.com is completely self-funded. No outside funds are accepted or used. This website does not utilize paid advertising as a source of revenue.

This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information:
verify here.

Author and Contributor to www.Spine-Health.com – July, 2015

www.Spine-Health.com/author/john-h-shim-md-facs

Chief of Surgery, Mease Countryside and Mease Dunedin Hospitals, Safety Harbor and Dunedin, Florida. 2014-2016.

Orthopaedic Section Chief Mease Countryside Hospital; Safety Harbor, Florida Mease Dunedin Hospital; Dunedin, Florida.2008-2013

Board Member Morton Plant Mease Research Council

Co-Director of Mease Neuro-Ortho Spine Center Mease Dunedin Hospital; Dunedin, Florida.

One of “6 Spine Physicians Ranked #1 on Google” – December 2016

Top Ten Most Liked Spine Surgeons on the Internet – July 2016

2016 Spine Surgeons to Know list – January 2016

2014 Spine Specialists to know list – September 2014

One of Ten Leaders of Certified Spine Programs – December 2011

 

The Best Orthopedics in Tampa

The information provided on this website does not provide or should be considered medical advice. It is not a substitute for diagnosis or treatment of any condition. The information provided is for informational purposes only. You should not rely solely on the information provided on this website in making a decision to pursue a specific treatment or advice. You should consult directly with a professional healthcare provider.

As a condition of using the information on this website, ShimSpine and its physicians are not responsible for any advice, diagnosis, treatment or outcome you may obtain.

ShimSpine.com is completely self-funded. No outside funds are accepted or used. This website does not utilize paid advertising as a source of revenue.
Outpatient Spine Surgery Considerations. www.Spine-Health.com. January 2016.

What is Spinal Stenosis? www.Spine-Health.com. October 2015.

Surgeon insights on the Changing Landscape of Orthopedic Care. OrthopedicToday. June 2014

Chapter 33: Interspinous Spacers. Shim JH, Mazza JS, Kim DH Published in Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Spinal Techniques. Elsevier Health Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Published 2011)

Chapter 35: Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Lumbar Fusion Technique.Shim JH, Mazza JS, Kim DH Published in Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Spinal Techniques. Elsevier Health Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Published 2011)

March 2010 Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting New Orleans, Louisiana February 2010

February 2010 A Review of Dynamic Stabilization in the Lumbar Spine Selby Spine Symposium; Park City, Utah

November 2009 Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Community Based Lecture; Tampa, Florida

September 2009 Instructor/Proctor Minimally Invasive Lumbar Cadaver Lab; Tampa, Florida

February 2009 New Spinal Technology: Cervical Disc Replacement and Interspinous Spacers. Selby Spine Symposium; Park City, Utah

February 2008 The Degenerative Spine: The Role of Dynamic Lumbar Stablization and Interspinous Spacers Selby Spine Symposium; Park City, Utah

October 2008 Emerging Technology and Techniques in Spinal Surgery Orthopaedics in the 21st Century Symposium; Morton Plant Mease Healthcare; Largo, Florida

September 2007 Emerging Technology in Spinal Surgery Orthopaedics in the 21st Century Symposium; Morton Plant Mease Healthcare; Largo, Florida

October 2006 Emerging Technology and Techniques in Spinal Surgery Orthopaedics in the 21st Century Symposium; Morton Plant Mease Healthcare; Largo, Florida

May 2005 The Role of Kyphoplasty in the Treatment of Vertebral Compression Fractures Mease Neurosciences Symposium; Clearwater, Florida
Please note all articles, blogs and Q&A’s on this site are general information and are not to be used as medical advice for individuals. No specific diagnosis or treatment should be made based on this information. Only a physician can provide you with advice specific to your situation. Please followup with your physician if you would like to discuss your individual condition.

If you are having a medical emergency,  contact your Doctor immediately,  or go to the Emergency Room.
ShimSpine and ShimSpine.com is committed to honoring and respecting the privacy and anonymity of the individuals using its website(s) and/or services. The purpose of this Privacy Policy is to inform the individuals about the collection, processing and protection of information done by ShimSpine what information we collect, why we collect this information and how we use this information.

This Privacy Policy will be reviewed regularly to reflect the up-to-date practices of ShimSpine.