Lehigh Med Summer 2019 - 21

L C M E D S O C .O R G

OVERALL, PHYSICIANS
TAKING THEIR CASE
TO TRIAL IN
PENNSYLVANIA
HAVE A GOOD CHANCE
OF OBTAINING A
FAVORABLE VERDICT
FROM THE JURY.
THE "PHILADELPHIA EFFECT" AT TRIAL.
Overall, physicians taking their case to trial in Pennsylvania have
a good chance of obtaining a favorable verdict from the jury. In
Pennsylvania from 2000-2017 out of the 3,507 cases decided by jury,
2,733 or 78% were found in favor of the defendants (i.e. the physician
or health system). Figure 2 shows the results of cases decided by jury.
From 2000-2017, state-wide juries outside of Philadelphia found
in favor of defendants, physicians or health systems, 83% of the
time. In contrast, Philadelphia juries found for the defendant only
64% of the time. Put in reverse, the plaintiff prevailed at trial 36%
of the time in Philadelphia, but only 17% of the time across the
rest the state. This is an increase of over 100%, and with an odds
ratio of 2.84 (95% CI 2.4-3.4, P<0.0001).

DOES VENUE INFLUENCE VERDICT
FINANCIAL AWARDS?

have a higher chance of being greater than $5 million (OR 1.61,
95% CI 1.04-2.49, P=0.0310).
For awards greater than $10 million, the odds ratio is 1.71,
95% CI 0.90-3.23, P=0.0993.
As seen in Figure 4, higher verdicts occur at greater percentages
in Philadelphia County meaning that there appears to be a positive
correlation between Philadelphia and large verdicts.

CONCLUSION
There does appear to be a statistically significant "Philadelphia
Effect" in malpractice cases compared to the rest of the state,
indicating that venue does indeed play a role in outcomes. From
2000-2017, there was a statistically significant difference in the
number of cases decided in favor of the plaintiff in Philadelphia
(OR 2.84, 95% CI 2.4-3.4, P<0.0001). In terms of payouts, awards
greater than $5 million were more likely to occur in Philadelphia
with statistical significance (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.49, P=0.0310).
Awards greater than $10 million, while more likely to occur in
Philadelphia, did not reach the level of statistical significance (OR
1.71, 95% CI 0.90-3.23, P=0.0993). The disparity in odds in
terms of winning at trial and in jury awards greater than $5 million
explains why certain advocacy groups such as plaintiff attorneys
fight for broader latitude in choosing where a case is adjudicated.
And why physician groups and other health care entities fear that
the proposed rules change would have a negative impact on access
to the quality health care expected from citizens of Pennsylvania.

LIMITATIONS
This study does not take into account the reason for alleged
malpractice, specialties involved, or the number of defendants in
various cases.
1 http://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/research-and-statistics, accessed 1/251/30/2019
2 Jena AB, Chandra A, Lakdawalla D, Seabury S. Outcomes of Medical Malpractice Litigation Against US Physicians. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(11):892-894.
doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1416

Another possible effect of venue selection may be related to
the amount that is awarded to the plaintiff given a verdict in favor
of the plaintiff. Figure 3 shows that 29/53 and 24/41 verdicts
greater than $5 million and $10 million occurred in Philadelphia
County which is 55% and 58%, respectively. Statewide, 28% of
malpractice trials in Pennsylvania from 2000-2017 occurred in
Philadelphia County. Overall, the plaintiff verdicts in Philadelphia
SUMMER 2019 | Lehigh County Health & Medicine 21

http://www.LCMEDSOC.ORG http://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/research-and-statistics

Lehigh Med Summer 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Lehigh Med Summer 2019