Abstract
BACKGROUND: Expert committees of the German medical associations provide a free and out-of-court evaluation of putative cases of medical malpractice. They prepare reports that contain valuable information on process steps that precede the actual treatment error. The aim of the present study was to identify and systematically categorize individual process steps in the expert reports and thus to lay the foundations for the understanding of malpractice evaluation processes. METHODS: In this study, ten randomly selected and anonymized expert reports of the Expert Committee for Questions of Medical Liability of the District Medical Association of South Württemberg with identified GP treatment errors were evaluated, using the method of qualitative content analysis. In an iterative process, central elements of expert reports were classified into a deductively and inductively built category system. RESULTS: Six main categories with associated subcategories were identified: 1) structural aspects of the report, 2) doctor-patient communication, 3) medical course, 4) patient's experience, 5) action by the GP team, and 6) coordinative role in the health care system. The category system showed sufficient reliability with repeated use. CONCLUSION: This study offers an opportunity to learn from errors. The proposed system allows to structure the complexity of expert reports on GP malpractice and may thus serve as a tool in various contexts. In particular, it facilitates the preparation and comparative analysis of reports in a structured way. It could also be used in health care research as well as in education and training.