Trends in medical malpractice claims in patients with cleft or craniofacial abnormalities in the United States

An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigation Involving Orbital Fractures

BACKGROUND

Orbital fractures frequently require operative management by a plastic and reconstructive surgeon. Due to the proximity to the globe and complexity of the reconstruction, orbital fractures, and related procedures have the potential to be a source of medical litigation. The aim of the present study was to review orbital fracture malpractice litigation, including case outcomes and compensatory damages.

METHODS

The Westlaw and Lexis Nexis databases were queried for jury verdicts and settlements related to orbital fracture malpractice lawsuits. The Boolean terms included "orbit! /10 fracture," "orbit! & fracture," and "ocular & fracture" for both databases. Cases were included if they were state or federal cases related to both orbital fracture and medical malpractice involving surgical or medical mismanagement or misdiagnosis of orbital fracture.

RESULTS

A total of 49 cases from 1994 to 2018 met inclusion criteria between the databases. The most common legal complaint was the defendant's failure to make a diagnosis either by not ordering the proper radiological tests or by not interpreting radiological tests correctly, seen in 35% of cases. In 57% of the cases, the defendant was a surgeon, 46% of which involved a plastic surgeon specifically. Cases were resolved in favor of the defendant 49% of the time. Most cases (57%) resulted in a monetary outcome of $0. However, cases that were decided in favor of the plaintiff had significant compensatory damages with the majority being over $100,000, and 1 case as high as $8 million.

CONCLUSION

Although almost half of the orbital fracture malpractice cases resulted in an outcome favoring the defendant, significant monetary consequences against the defendant were possible in cases when the plaintiff prevailed.

Malpractice Claims of Internal Medicine Involving Diagnostic and System Errors in Japan

Objectives Medical litigation resulting from diagnostic errors leads to lawsuits that are time-consuming, expensive, and psychologically burdensome. Few studies have focused on internists, who are more likely to make diagnostic errors than others, with assessments of litigation in terms of system and diagnostic errors. This study explored factors contributing to internists losing lawsuits and examined whether system or diagnostic errors were more important on the outcome. Methods Data regarding 419 lawsuits against internists closed between 1961 and 2017 were extracted from a public Japanese database. Factors affecting litigation outcomes were identified by comparative analysis focusing on system and diagnostic errors, environmental factors, and differences in initial diagnoses. Results Overall, 419 malpractice claims against internists were analyzed. The rate of lawsuits being decided against internists was high (50.1%). The primary cause of litigation was diagnostic errors (213, 54%), followed by system errors (188, 45%). The foremost initial diagnostic error was "no abnormality" (17.2%) followed by ischemic heart disease (9.6%) and malignant neoplasm (8.1%). Following cause-adjustment for loss, system errors were 21.37 times more likely to lead to a loss. Losses were 6.26 times higher for diagnostic error cases, 2.49 times higher for errors occurring at night, and 3.44 times higher when "malignant neoplasm" was the first diagnosis. Conclusions This study found that system errors strongly contributed to internists' losses. Diagnostic errors, night shifts, and initial diagnoses of malignant neoplasms also significantly affected trial outcomes. Administrators must focus on both system errors and diagnostic errors to enhance the safety of patients and reduce internists' risk exposure.

A detailed analysis of pediatric surgical malpractice claims in Germany: what is the probability of a pediatric surgeon to be accused or convicted?

AIM OF THE STUDY

Pediatric surgeons treat a vulnerable population in which unfavorable outcome can lead to substantial long-term costs, placing them at risk for malpractice claims. This study aims to characterize the frequency and circumstances in which malpractice claims were successfully brought against pediatric surgeons in Germany over the last 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Anonymous data on medical treatment errors and payments were acquired from the Federal Chamber of Physicians from 2014 through 2018 and analyzed for most frequent diagnoses and circumstances that resulted in accusation or conviction. Those claims that were successfully rebutted were compared to as controls. Lifetime risk for being involved in litigation and its outcome was calculated.

RESULTS

There were 129 medical malpractice claims over the 5-year observation period. Medical error was confirmed in 56 cases (43%); the rest were successfully appealed. The risk of the prototypical German pediatric surgeon to be accused was 5.24% and to be convicted 2.27% per year in practice. The most common reasons for conviction (alone or in combination) were surgical-technical errors (23%), treatment delay (21%), insufficient workup (17%), incorrect diagnosis (17%), and incomplete consent (16%).The most frequent circumstances leading to a conviction were trauma (27%), inguinal hernia (7%), circumcision (7%), testicular torsion (7%), acute abdomen (7%), and appendicitis (5%).

CONCLUSION

Over a 40-year career, pediatric surgeons in Germany face an average calculated risk of 2.1 to be accused and 0.9 to be convicted of malpractice claims. Certain circumstances pose higher risks for litigation than others. Knowledge of these patterns may help practitioners avoid medicolegal confrontation.

Characteristics and Burden of Diagnostic Error-Related Malpractice Claims in Neurosurgery

BACKGROUND

Neurosurgery is a specialty associated with high risk of malpractice claims, which can be influenced by quality and safety of care. Diagnostic errors have gained increasing attention as a potentially preventable problem. Despite the burden of diagnostic errors, few studies have analyzed diagnostic errors in neurosurgery. We aimed to delineate the effect of diagnostic errors on malpractice claims involving a neurosurgeon.

METHODS

This retrospective study used the national Japanese malpractice claims database and included cases closed between 1961 and 2017. To examine the effect of diagnostic errors in neurosurgery, we compared diagnostic error-related claims (DERCs) with non-DERCs in indemnity, clinical outcomes, and factors relating to neurosurgeons.

RESULTS

There were 95 closed malpractice claims involving neurosurgeons during the study period. Of these claims, 36 (37.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 28.7%-47.9%) were DERCs. Patient death was the most common outcome associated with DERCs. Wrong, delayed, and missed diagnosis occurred in 25 (69.4%, 95% CI 53.1%-82.0%), 4 (11.1%, 95% CI 4.4%-25.3%), and 7 (19.4%, 95% CI 9.8%-35.0%) cases, respectively. The most common presenting medical condition in DERCs was stroke. Subarachnoid hemorrhage, accounting for 85.7% of stroke cases, led to 27.8% of the total indemnity paid in DERCs.

CONCLUSIONS

DERCs are associated with higher numbers of accepted claims and worse outcomes. Identifying diagnostic errors is important in neurosurgery, and countermeasures are required to reduce the burden on neurosurgeons and improve quality. This is the first study to focus on diagnostic errors in malpractice claims arising from neurosurgery.

Factors and impact of physicians' diagnostic errors in malpractice claims in Japan

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic errors are prevalent and associated with increased economic burden; however, little is known about their characteristics at the national level in Japan. This study aimed to investigate clinical outcomes and indemnity payment in cases of diagnostic errors using Japan's largest database of national claims.

METHODS

We analyzed characteristics of diagnostic error cases closed between 1961 and 2017, accessed through the national Japanese malpractice claims database. We compared diagnostic error-related claims (DERC) with non-diagnostic error-related claims (non-DERC) in terms of indemnity, clinical outcomes, and factors underlying physicians' diagnostic errors.

RESULTS

All 1,802 malpractice claims were included in the analysis. The median patient age was 33 years (interquartile range = 10-54), and 54.2% were men. Deaths were the most common outcome of claims (939/1747; 53.8%). In total, 709 (39.3%, 95% CI: 37.0%-41.6%) DERC cases were observed. The adjusted total billing amount, acceptance rate, adjusted median claims payments, and proportion of deaths were significantly higher in DERC than non-DERC cases. Departments of internal medicine and surgery were 1.42 and 1.55 times more likely, respectively, to have DERC cases than others. Claims involving the emergency room (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 5.88) and outpatient office (adjusted OR = 2.87) were more likely to be DERC than other cases. The initial diagnoses most likely to lead to diagnostic error were upper respiratory tract infection, non-bleeding digestive tract disease, and "no abnormality."

CONCLUSIONS

Cases of diagnostic errors produced severe patient outcomes and were associated with high indemnity. These cases were frequently noted in general exam and emergency rooms as well as internal medicine and surgery departments and were initially considered to be common, mild diseases.

Unsolicited Patient Complaints among Otolaryngologists

Objectives

To analyze unsolicited patient complaints (UPCs) among otolaryngologists, identify risk factors for UPCs, and determine the impact of physician feedback on subsequent UPCs.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed UPCs associated with US otolaryngologists from 140 medical practices from 2014 to 2017. A subset of otolaryngologists with high UPCs received peer-comparative feedback and was monitored for changes.

Results

The study included 29,778 physicians, of whom 548 were otolaryngologists. UPCs described concerns with treatment (45%), communication (19%), accessibility (18%), concern for patients and families (10%), and billing (8%). Twenty-nine (5.3%) otolaryngologists were associated with 848 of 3659 (23.2%) total UPCs. Male sex and graduation from a US medical school were statistically significantly associated with an increased number of UPCs ( P = .0070 and P = .0036, respectively). Twenty-nine otolaryngologists with UPCs at or above the 95th percentile received peer-comparative feedback. The intervention led to an overall decrease in the number of UPCs following intervention ( P = .049). Twenty otolaryngologists (69%) categorized as “responders” reduced the number of complaints an average of 45% in the first 2 years following intervention.

Discussion

Physician demographic data can be used to identify otolaryngologists with a greater number of UPCs. Most commonly, UPCs expressed concern regarding treatment. Peer-delivered, comparative feedback can be effective in reducing UPCs in high-risk otolaryngologists.

Implications for Practice

Systematic monitoring and respectful sharing of peer-comparative patient complaint data offers an intervention associated with UPCs and concomitant malpractice risk reduction. Collegial feedback over time increases the response rate, but a small proportion of physicians will require directive interventions.