Patient information in orthopedic and trauma surgery. Fundamental knowledge, legal aspects and practical recommendations

Epidemiology of complications after non-compulsory planned hardware-removal after limbs fracture

INTRODUCTION

Removal of hardware (HR) following a fracture is a frequent question from patients. The incidence of this kind of intervention remains very variable depending on the healthcare systems and its interest is debated in view of the benefits and associated risks that remain poorly defined. Mandatory preoperative information cannot be given optimally in this context.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the rate of complications (major and minor) after non-compulsory planned hardware-removal following a limb fracture.

HYPOTHESIS

The rate of major complications was greater than 1%.

METHODS

A 10-year retrospective single-center study included 1990 patients who had undergone routine HR. Analysis of medical records, with a minimum of one year of follow-up, allowed us to collect: patient data, the type and anatomical location of the osteosynthesis material, as well as the occurrence of a postoperative complication, categorized as a major complication (resulting in either a new surgical procedure, re-hospitalization, or lasting functional impairment) or a minor complication.

RESULTS

Overall, 4.1% (79/1990) of patients experienced postoperative complications, including 1.56% (31/1990) major complications and 21 surgical revisions (1.06%). The time to onset of complications was 9.1 +/- 8.4 days. The most common complications were deep infections and impaired skin healing with superficial infection (55/79, 69.6%). Locations "around the knee" and "around the ankle" were at higher risk of complications (p < 0.01). Smoking was identified as a significant risk factor for complications, particularly deep infection (p = 0.004, OR = 8.7 [1.98; 38.11]).

DISCUSSION

Non-mandatory routine RH has a significant complication rate even in a healthy population. Preoperative information of the patient and the assessment of the benefit/risk balance are essential in this indication. This study also raises the question of mandatory smoking cessation preoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

Reasons for malpractice claims after primary total hip arthroplasty in France: Insurance data from 240 claims from 2014 to 2017

INTRODUCTION

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most frequent orthopedic surgery procedures, and orthopedic surgeons are among the most frequently accused of malpractice by their patients. Identifying the main reasons for malpractice claims after THA is a prior condition to reducing their frequency. The quality of the preoperative risk information given to the patient by the surgeon is crucial for these purposes. Data specific to THA are sparse in France, and we therefore conducted a retrospective study (1) to determine whether the outcome of medico-legal expert appraisal correlated with the quality and traceability of preoperative information, and (2) to identify the most frequent grounds for complaint after primary THA.

HYPOTHESIS

The quality of patient information partly determines expert appraisal.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A retrospective study was conducted based on data from the Branchet medical professional insurance agency for malpractice claims following THA over the period 2014-2017, with 240 complete files, for 125 women and 115 men. Data comprised: type of procedure, main grounds of complaint (complications), positive or negative expert appraisal, quality of preoperative patient information, amounts of compensation accorded and fees paid, and the practitioner's liability. We assessed correlations between information quality and liability.

RESULTS

Surgical site infection and neurologic deficit were the two main grounds for malpractice claims. In the 240 files, cases for 106 operations (44.2%) were submitted to arbitration, 95 (39.6%) were brought to court, and 39 (16.2%) were settled out of court. The practitioner was held at least partly liable in 40 files (16.7%). Information to the patient was deemed imperfect or poor for 119 files (49.6%) and good in 121 (50.4%). Mean compensation was €30,940 (range, €0 to €198,100). In 27 of the 40 cases of liability (67.5%), the information to the patient was deemed imperfect or poor. Twenty-six of the 40 cases (65%) were settled out of court. In case of poor information, there was a significant risk for the practitioner to be held liable: 7.5 vs. 25% (p=0.003).

DISCUSSION

The present study listed the main complications underlying malpractice claims after THA: infection, neurologic complications, and limb-length discrepancy. This should enable practitioners to improve patient information so as to reduce the rate of malpractice claims or at least decrease the practitioner's liability, as the study found a correlation between information quality and expert appraisal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

[Medical information of patients with implants: Findings and prospects]

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to assess the level of knowledge and information received by patients regarding their implants and to discuss the role of community pharmacists.

METHODS

A prospective survey was conducted in 3 pharmacies among patients presenting for various reasons. Firstly, on the same day, all patients visiting the pharmacy were asked if they had an implant. Secondly, patients with implants were offered a short survey consisting of 16 questions concerning the implant and the information received.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The survey was conducted with 178 patients, among whom 11.4% had implants. The majority of them reported having osteoarticular, dental, or ophthalmic implants. Women were 67.1% of the cohort. None of the 178 patients with implants in the survey had complete information about their implant and its follow-up, which would enable optimal care and effective reporting in case of potential complications.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients visiting the pharmacy had received limited or inadequate information about their implants. Community pharmacists, as local healthcare providers, in collaboration with hospitals, could play a crucial role in patient education. During the initial dispensing of postoperative treatments, pharmacists could inform and advise patients to enhance their patient journey.

MAPPinfo - mapping quality of health information: Validation study of an assessment instrument

BACKGROUND

Health information is a prerequisite for informed choices-decisions, made by individuals about their own health based on knowledge and in congruence with own preferences. Criteria for development, content and design have been defined in a corresponding guideline. However, no instruments exist that provide reasonably operationalised measurement items. Therefore, we drafted the checklist, MAPPinfo, addressing the existing criteria with 19 items.

OBJECTIVES

The current study aimed to validate MAPPinfo.

METHODS

Five substudies were conducted subsequently at the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany and the Medical University of Graz, Austria: (1) to determine content validity through expert reviews of the first draft, (2) to determine feasibility using 'think aloud' in piloting with untrained users, (3) to determine inter-rater reliability and criterion validity through a pretest on 50 health information materials, (4) to determine construct validity using 50 developers' self-declarations about development methods as a reference standard, (5) to determine divergent validity in comparison with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) (expanded) Scale. The analyses used were qualitative methods and correlation-based methods for determining both inter-rater reliability and validity.

RESULTS

The instrument was considered by experts to operationalise the existing guidelines convincingly. Health and nursing science students found it easy to understand and use. It also had good interrater reliability (mean of T coefficients = .79) and provided a very good estimate of the reference standard (Spearman's rho = .89), implying sound construct validity. Finally, comparison with the EQIP instrument revealed important and distinct areas of similarities and differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The new instrument is ready for use as a screening instrument without the need for training. According to its underpinning concept the instrument exclusively comprises items which are justified by either ethics or research evidence, implying negligence of not yet evidence based, however, potentially important criteria. Further research is needed to complete the body of evidence-based criteria, aiming at an extension of the guideline and MAPPinfo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

AsPredicted22546; date of registration: 24 July 2019.

Epidemiology of the causes of complaints after discectomy collected from a French insurance company

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar discectomy is a frequent procedure performed by surgeons from specialties at risk of patient complaints. The objective of the study was to analyze the causes of litigations following lumbar discectomy to be able to reduce their frequency.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This observational, retrospective study was carried out at a French insurance company (Branchet). All files opened between the 1st of January 2003 and the 31st of December 2020, following lumbar discectomy without instrumentation and without any other associated code, undertaken by a surgeon insured by Branchet, were analyzed. The data was extracted from the database by a consultant from the insurance company and analyzed by an orthopedic surgeon.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four records met all inclusion criteria and were complete and available for analysis. Infection was the leading cause of litigation, responsible for 27% of complaints. Residual postoperative pain was the second cause of complaint with 26% of cases, of which 93% had persistent pain. Neurological deficits were the third cause of complaint with 25% of cases among which 76% were related to the appearance of a deficit and 20% related to the persistence of an existing deficit. Early recurrence of herniated disc also appeared as a cause of complaint, accounting for 7% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Surgical site infection, persistence of pain, and the appearance or persistence of neurological disorders are the primary causes of complaints leading to investigation in the aftermath of lumbar discectomy. It seems essential to us that this information be brought to the attention of surgeons to enable them to better adapt their explanations in the delivery of preoperative information.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Impact of the bidirectional relationship between communication and cognitive efficacy on orthopedic patient adherence behavior

Background

There is growing interest in patient autonomy, and communication between physicians and patients has become the essential cornerstone for improving the quality of healthcare services. Previous research has concentrated on the direct effect of physician-patient communication on service outcomes. In the present study, we examined the influence among constructs in the service process and the impact on healthcare outcomes. The present study used behavioral theory to expand the process aspect of the Donabedian healthcare service quality structure-process-outcome model to examine the impact of cognitive changes and communication feedback on patients’ adherence behavior. In addition, the moderating effect of hospital facility levels is examined.

Methods

A conceptual model was developed and tested using a questionnaire administered to patients in eight hospitals. A total of 397 respondents returned usable surveys, with a response rate of 92.11%. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data in two steps that involved a measurement model and a structural model. The former was applied to estimate the Cronbach’s alphas, intercorrelations of factors, and descriptive statistics; the latter was used to test the hypothesized relationships of the constructs.

Results

The results identified three mediators of the healthcare process within the healthcare services framework: physician-patient communication, cognitive efficacy, and adherence behavior. Physician-patient communication influenced cognitive efficacy (β = 0.16, p < 0.001), and cognitive efficacy influenced physician-patient communication (β = 0.18, p < 0.001). The effect of this bidirectional relationship on adherence behavior was positive (β = 0.38, p < 0.001). The healthcare structure influenced healthcare outcomes via these three healthcare process constructs. The adherence behavior of patients who were treated in the medical center has greater influences by the structure and physician-patient communication than it was treated in the regional hospitals.

Conclusions

This study revealed a complex pattern in relationships among process constructs for healthcare services. The findings of this study acknowledge the important potential interrelationships among the healthcare service constructs to improve the quality of healthcare outcomes.

Trial registration

CRREC104107. Date: 22/01/2016. Prospectively Registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07575-5.

Malpractice claims in forefoot surgery

Foot and hallux valgus surgery are amongst the most commonly performed surgeries, with a growing number of procedures leading to litigation. The aim of this conference is to provide an update on the causes of malpractice claims and the associated risk factors. What are the causes of litigation? Acute or chronic residual pain, stiffness, metatarsalgia, consolidation delays, secondary displacements, suboptimal results are the most common causes found in litigious proceedings. What are the risk factors? Surgeon-related and patient-related risk factors exist. Percutaneous surgery or the development of outpatient hospitalization are not specific risk factors. From the point of view of practitioners, the application and traceability of recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis, for thromboembolic disease, or for the checklist are essential, allowing causes of blame to be easily avoided. Information is fundamental. Since the Law of the 4th of March 2002, the surgeon-patient relationship has changed. Pre-operative information archived in the practitioner's file is essential. This includes written and oral information which is consented to and understood by the patient. Thus, the understanding and compliance with immediate post-operative instructions or adherence to the post-operative program are success factors regarding the surgical outcome. The patient must also be informed and aware of their own individual risk factors (e.g. smoking and immunosuppression, particularly) which require greater caution. What is the best way to reduce the risk of these claims being made? It is about traceability: traceability of clinical examination, procedures, information and exchanges with the patient. It is only under this principle that the surgeon-patient relationship can be clearer, respectful and consequently less conducive to litigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V; expert opinion.

Litigation in arthroscopic surgery: a 20-year analysis of legal actions in France

PURPOSE

The main objective of this study was to identify the epidemiological characteristics of litigation following arthroscopic procedures, performed in private practice and public hospitals in France. The secondary objective was to establish a risk profile for medical malpractice lawsuits after arthroscopic surgery.

METHODS

All court decisions related to arthroscopic surgery between 1994 and 2020 were collected and reviewed cases from the two main French legal databases (Legifrance and Doctrine). Data were retrospectively collected and included: gender, joint and defendant's specialty involved, reason behind the lawsuit, initial indication and the type of arthroscopic procedure performed. The final verdicts as well as the indemnity awarded to the plaintiff (if any) were recorded.

RESULTS

One-hundred eighty cases met the inclusion criteria of the study and were analyzed: 58 cases were before administrative courts and 122 were before civil courts. An orthopaedic surgeon was involved alone or in solidum in 45.6% of cases (82/180), followed by anesthesiologists in 5.6% (10/180). The private surgery center or public hospital were implicated in 63.9% (115/180) of cases. The 2 most common joints involved in litigation following arthroscopic surgery were the knee (82.2%, n = 148) and the shoulder (11.1%, n = 20). The main reasons behind the lawsuit were related to postoperative infection in 78/180 cases and to a musculoskeletal complication in 45/180 cases (25%). A failure to inform was also reported in 34/180 cases (18.9%). Of the 180 cases, 122 cases (67.8%) resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff. The average indemnity award for the plaintiff was 77.984 euros [2.282-1.117.667]. A verdict for the plaintiff was significantly associated with postoperative infection or a wrong-side surgery, while technical error and musculoskeletal complications were more significantly likely to result in a verdict in favor of the defendant (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study evaluated and mapped lawsuits following after arthroscopic surgery in France over a period of more than 20 years. The main joint involved in lawsuits was knee. The main causes of lawsuits following arthroscopic surgery were related to postoperative infection, musculoskeletal complications and failure to inform.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Preoperative information: Written first?

Patient information is now an ethical and legal obligation in France; it is the physician who is required to provide proof. The Law of March 4, 2002 and the code of ethics and main legal and regulatory texts are, however, imprecise on some points. Written documents, although not stipulated in law, are in practice essential, supplementing the indispensable oral information given by the surgeon in individual personalized interview. Patients remember only some of this information, and overestimate their own understanding of it. Written documents are therefore essential to compensate for this. Their contents need validation by scientific societies. In case of disagreement, the medical file is the essential means of assessing information quality, and should be kept up to date as rigorously as possible. A key document is the letter summarizing the preoperative consultation, validating surgery, which should be drawn up in a manner that meets the obligation to inform. Signed consent is not mandatory in law, but is necessary in practice and should be archived. For judges, proof of information is based on several elements: the complete structured letter to the patient and community physician plus the signed information sheet and consent form constitute solid evidence and all three should be included in the medical file. Information has now become a part of health-care in itself. In a context of increasing litigation, "defensive medicine" is still to be avoided but physicians should have their own check-lists so as to be in a position to prove delivery of structured information if called upon to do so. In the absence of proven information, patients can plead loss of chance and/or prejudice for lack of preparation and/or infringement of dignity, and claim damages from the courts.

Ten-year epidemiological study in an orthopaedic and trauma surgery centre: Are there risks involved in increasing scheduled arthroplasty volume without increasing resources?

BACKGROUND

Current trends in patient management include decreasing hospital stay lengths and reductions in available material and human resources. A shortening of hospital stays in university hospitals has been documented over the last decade. However, to our knowledge, no study has assessed possible relationships linking shorter stays to staffing levels or complication rates. The objectives of this study were: 1) to assess changes in case volume in a university orthopaedics and trauma surgery department between 2006 and 2016, 2) and to look for correlations linking these changes to staffing levels and the rates of significant complications, including the number of hip dislocations after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the number of infections and complications resulting in malpractice litigation after hip, knee, or shoulder arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS

The case volume increased during the study period, whereas resources remained unchanged or decreased.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed using the electronic database of an orthopaedics and trauma surgery department. Data collected between 2006 and 2016 were analysed. Mean hospital stay length, patient age, and surgical volume were recorded, and changes over time in case volume for trauma surgery and scheduled arthroplasties were evaluated. Changes in staffing levels and rates of complications (dislocation after THA and infections and complications resulting in malpractice litigation) between 2006 and 2016 were assessed. Only arthroplasty procedures performed in the department were considered for the study of complications and litigation.

RESULTS

Between 2006 and 2016, mean hospital stay decreased from 8.7±10.8 days (range, 0-141 days) in to 7.0±9.4 days (range, 0-150 days). Mean patient age increased from 54.4±21.2 years (range, 11.7-100.9 years) in 2006 to 59.3±20.9 years (range, 13.2-103.1 years) in 2016. The total number of procedures rose from 2158 in 2006 to 3100 in 2016 (+43.6%). The number of THAs increased by 16.2% and the number of total knee arthroplasties by 96.7%. The number of operations for trauma increased from 725 in 2006 to 1135 in 2016 (+56.0%). During the study period, the number of hospital beds declined from 70 to 55. No increase was seen in the frequencies of dislocation after THA (3/284 [1.4%] in 2006 and 4/330 [1.2%] in 2016) or prosthetic joint infection (5/439 [1.1%] in 2006 and 6/657 [0.9%] in 2016). In contrast, malpractice suits filed by patients after arthroplasty increased from 1/439 (0.2%) in 2006 to 8/657 (1.2%) in 2016.

CONCLUSION

Over the last decade, trauma and arthroplasty surgical volumes increased substantially, whereas staffing levels remained unchanged and number of beds diminished. The frequency of significant complications such as dislocation after THA did not increase. In contrast, a marked rise was seen in malpractice litigation. However, the increased volume with unchanged resources found in this study should be interpreted in the light of the marked increase in patient dependency and of our role as a referral centre managing patients with complications after surgery performed at other institutions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective observational study.

Litigation in orthopedic surgery: What can we do to prevent it? Systematic analysis of 126 legal actions involving four university hospitals in France

INTRODUCTION

Orthopedic surgery produces 20% of medical malpractice claims. However only a few studies have examined the reasons for and consequences of these disputes, and they have usually been limited to a single hospital. This led us to perform a retrospective analysis of the claims at four teaching hospitals in northwestern France. The goals were (1) to describe the circumstances that led to these claims and recommend ways to prevent them, and (2) to describe the conduct of the proceedings and their financial and social outcomes.

HYPOTHESIS

A systematic analysis of litigation cases will provide accurate information on the circumstances leading to these claims.

METHODS

The study included 126 disputes settled between 2000 and 2010 and related to orthopedic or trauma care given at one of four teaching hospitals in northwestern France. The method of recourse, grounds of the complaint, type of surgical procedure, expert findings and amount of the award were systematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Of these 126 cases, 54 (43%) of them were submitted to the French CRCI (regional conciliation and compensation commission), 48 (39%) to the French administrative courts and 51 (41%) were settled amicably. Multiple methods of recourse were used in 21% of cases (n=27/126). The average length of administrative court proceedings was 36.7±27 months [4-102], which was significantly longer than the CRCI proceedings (22.7±17.9 months [3-80]) or out-of-court settlement (23.7±21.5 months [0-52]) (p<0.0001). Damages were sought for medical error or treatment-related risk in 67.5% of the complaints (n=85/126), and for failure to inform in 15.8% of cases (n=20/126). There was a suspected surgical site infection in 79.3% of cases (n=100/126). There were multiple grounds for complaint in 68.3% of cases (n=86/126). Poor communication between the physician and patient was identified in 26.2% of cases (n=33/126). Damages were awarded in 25% of cases (n=31/126), with an average award of €58,303±€91,601 [0-357,970].

CONCLUSION

The primary grounds for legal action are infection-related complications combined with a deterioration in the doctor-patient relationship. Disputes could be prevented by continuing efforts to combat hospital-acquired infections and providing better communications training.

LEVEL OF PROOF

IV (retrospective study).

Epidemiology of malpractice claims in the orthopedic and trauma surgery department of a French teaching hospital: A 10-year retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Orthopedic and trauma surgery is the specialty for which claims for compensation are most often filed. Little data exists on the subject in France, especially in a teaching hospital. We conducted a retrospective study aimed at (1) identifying the epidemiological characteristics of patients filing claims against the orthopedic surgery and traumatology department of a teaching hospital in France, (2) analyzing the surgical procedures involved, the type of legal proceedings, and the financial consequences.

HYPOTHESIS

The epidemiological profile of proceedings seeking damages in France is consistent with the data from European and American studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational, retrospective, single-center study of all claims for damages between 2007 and 2016 involving the orthopedic and trauma surgery department of a teaching hospital was carried out. Patients' epidemiological data, the surgical procedure, type of legal proceeding, and financial consequences were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 51,582 surgical procedures performed, 71 claims (0.0014%) were analyzed (i.e., 1/726 procedures). A significant increase in the number of cases (p=0.040) was found over a 10-year period. Of these, 36/71 (53.7%) were submitted to the French regional conciliation and compensation commission (CRCI), 23/71 (32.8%) were filed with the administrative court, and 12/71 (13.4%) were submitted for an amicable settlement. The most common reason for which patients filed claims was hospital-acquired infections, with 36/71 (50.7%) cases. Twenty-nine complaints (40.8%) resulted in monetary damages being awarded to the patient, with an average award of € 28,301 (€ 2,400-299,508). Damage awards were significantly higher (p<0.05) for cases involving surgery on a lower limb than those involving an upper limb.

CONCLUSION

Claims against orthopedic surgeons have been increasing significantly over the last 10 years. Although rare, they represent a significant cost to society. Hospital-acquired infections are the main reason for disputes in our specialization.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.