Medical liability reform passed. (News at Deadline).

By a narrow vote of 217 to 203, the U.S. House of Representatives approved medical liability reform legislation - H.R. 4600 - otherwise known as the Help Efficient Accessible, Low Cost, Timely Health Care (HEALTH) Act of 2002.

The medical community and the managed care industry were united, with representatives of both sides praising the vote.

Karen Ignagni, president of the American Association of Health Plans issued a statement declaring, "President Bush has made a commitment to protecting consumers by ridding the health care system of frivolous litigation and today the House of Representatives took an important step in that direction. We applaud the House for addressing the medical malpractice crisis and the countless abuses of personal injury lawyers. The substantive provisions of this bill will help reduce health care costs for all Americans."

The American Medical Association issued a similar statement saying that the legislation would help end the litigation lottery, where a few patients and their lawyers get astronomical awards and many others lose access to care because of it.

The AMA said the reform bill is based on a California medical liability system that's fair to patients and holds down malpractice costs.

Other supporters of the legislation, such as Mary Grealy, president of the Healthcare Leadership Council, contend that patients who are injured are entitled to timely and full compensation for economic losses such as future medical expenses and loss of future earnings. But awards for non-economic and punitive damages have spun out of control, as have the number of class-action filings, she says.

The measure includes a number of features designed to contain malpractice costs.

To encourage the speedy resolution of claims it requires plaintiffs bring claims within three years of the date of injury, one year after the injury is discovered, or one year from when the injury would have been discovered. It limits non-economic damages to $250,000 regardless of the number of parties being sued. Damages are allocated in direct proportion to a party's percentage of responsibility for the injury. Courts would be permitted to severely limit attorney contingent fees.

As might be expected, given the closeness of the vote in the House, there's plenty of opposition to the bill. The measure's foes say it will deprive patients of their rights and not reduce malpractice costs. They argue that attention should be paid to making patients safer and reducing medical errors, rather than shifting costs to injured patients. The measure faces a doubtful future in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

James A. Hawkins is a health care writer based in Aiken, S.C. He can be reached by phone at 803/414-2062 or by e-mail at [e-mail].