Medical malpractice lawsuits generally require expert testimony. Defen
dants and plaintiffs deserve expert testimony that is exacting, accura
te, and consistent. A study of four frequently testifying experts was
undertaken with review of depositions, reports, and trial transcripts
of those experts. Contradictions in claimed medical principles from on
e case to the next were found and examples were cited for each expert.
The review suggested that expert testimony regarding the standard of
care may be neither reliable nor accurate for the purposes of judging
physician conduct is lawsuits. Presently, no peer review or sanction p
rocess has been implemented to ensure accuracy and reliability of expe
rt testimony used in medical malpractice lawsuits. We recommend change
s that would include independent court-appointed experts, central fili
ng of opinion letters by experts with authoritative text citations, an
d a sanction process by courts and/or authorized boards for testimony
that is deemed inaccurate, false, or contradictory to the standard of
care.