Alleged malpractice in orthopaedics. Analysis of a series of medmal insurance claims

Medical Malpractice Litigation Following Hindfoot Arthrodesis

Given high patient expectations in the setting of complex surgeries, orthopedic surgeons are at risk of being subject to malpractice claims which can impose significant economic and psychological burden. This study investigates malpractice claims against orthopedic surgeons and podiatrists performing hindfoot arthrodesis and determine factors associated with plaintiff verdicts and settlements using the Westlaw legal database. The database was queried for all cases involving hindfoot arthrodesis using the terms "malpractice" and either "ankle fusion," "arthrodesis," "subtalar fusion," "tibiotalar fusion," "tibiotalocalcaneal fusion," "TTC fusion," or "tibiofibular fusion" from 1987 to 2023. Data regarding patient demographics, causes cited for litigation, case outcomes, and indemnity settlements were collected. Cases were excluded if the defendant was not an orthopedic surgeon or a podiatrist, the procedure involved was not a hindfoot arthrodesis, or if the patient was a minor. Forty-five cases of hindfoot arthrodesis met the inclusion criteria. The mean plaintiff age was 51.5 ± 13.8 years with 51.1% male. Thirty-three cases (73%) were in favor of the defendant, with an average inflation-adjusted payout of $853,863 (±456,179). The most alleged category of negligence was procedural/intraoperative error (75%) followed by postsurgical error (38%) and failure to inform (31%). The most common specific damages included functional/ROM limitation (49%), need for additional surgery (47%), continuing/worsened pain (27%), and nonunion/malunion (29%). Given the frequency of hindfoot arthrodesis performed, this study highlights the importance of effective communication with patients concerning potential postoperative complications, prognosis of their injury, and risks and benefits associated with each treatment modality.

Medical errors, affected sites, and adverse consequences among patients in the orthopaedic department: Does age matter?

Background

Orthopaedics have become the focus of research on patient safety due to the high incidence of medical errors. Previous studies were based on all orthopaedic patients and rarely conducted empirical analyses from the perspective of age. This study aimed to fill the academic gap in the age variable by comparing medical errors, affected sites, and adverse consequences in orthopaedic patients.

Methods

This retrospective study included 329 litigation claims against orthopaedists using data from China Judgments Online. First, we performed computer crawling and screened 5,237 litigation documents using keywords, including medical errors. Second, 2,536 samples were retained through systematic random sampling, and 549 irrelevant cases were deleted after manual reading. Finally, three clinicians from different medical departments selected 329 incidents related to orthopaedics for further analysis, according to the description of the lawsuits. Three other professional orthopaedists evaluated the patients' ages, affected sites of medical errors, and adverse consequences.

Results

The greatest number of medical errors was observed in the joints (30.43%) for all orthopaedic patients. However, adult patients (aged 18-60 years) were most susceptible to errors in the extremities (30.42%). A higher rate of complications was associated with a higher rate of morbidity/mortality for the corresponding patients. Medical errors correlated with complications occurred in the following sites: joints (15.38%), extremities (12.50%), spine (16.95%), multiple sites (15.38%), and hands and feet (14.81%). In addition to surgical errors, over 10% of all orthopaedic patients experienced missed diagnoses. The incidence of insufficient adherence to informed consent obligations was 13.5% among adult patients and was much higher in paediatric and older adults patients. When orthopaedic patients suffered from medical technical errors, iatrogenic mortality/morbidity would decrease by 0.3% for one unit increase in age.

Conclusion

Dividing patients into different ages demonstrated diverse results in terms of medical errors and affected sites. Negligence in diagnosis and examination can be fatal factors that endanger safety, and complications may cause morbidity/mortality. When patients suffered from technical errors, age is inversely proportional to mortality/morbidity. Special attention needs to be paid to technical errors in the younger older adults population (60-64 years old), which has inspired implications in promoting aging and public health.

Risk identification and prediction of complaints and misconduct against health practitioners: a scoping review

Identifying the risk and predicting complaints and misconduct against health practitioners are essential for healthcare regulators to implement early interventions and develop long-term prevention strategies to improve professional practice and enhance patient safety. This scoping review aims to map out existing literature on the risk identification and prediction of complaints and misconduct against health practitioners. This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological framework. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases and finished on the same day (6 September 2021). Articles meeting the eligibility criteria were charted and descriptively analysed through a narrative analysis method. The initial search generated 5473 articles. After the identification, screening, and inclusion process, 81 eligible studies were included for data charting. Three key themes were reported: methods used for identifying risk factors and predictors of the complaints and misconduct, synthesis of identified risk factors and predictors in eligible studies, and predictive tools developed for complaints and misconduct against health practitioners. The findings reveal that risk identification and prediction of complaints and misconduct are complex issues influenced by multiple factors, exhibiting non-linear patterns and being context specific. Further efforts are needed to understand the characteristics and interactions of risk factors, develop systematic risk prediction tools, and facilitate the application in the regulatory environment.

Alleged Malpractice in Orthopedic Surgery in The Netherlands: Lessons Learned from Medical Disciplinary Jurisprudence

BACKGROUND

Orthopedic surgery is a specialty at risk for medical malpractice claims. We aimed to assess the frequency of alleged malpractice cases related to orthopedic surgery in the Netherlands from the last 15 years.

METHODS

We systematically searched the database of the Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court for verdicts related to orthopedic surgery between January 2009 and July 2023 and extracted case data and data on allegations and outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 158 verdicts (mean of 10.5 per year), of which 151 (96%) were filed against specialists and 7 (4%) against residents. Cases were most frequently classified as incorrect treatment/diagnosis (n = 107, 67.7%). Cases were related to the subspecialties of knee (n = 34, 21.5%), hip (n = 31, 19.6%), ankle (n = 25, 15.8%), spine (n = 22, 13.9%), and shoulder (n = 19, 12.0%). A total of 32 cases (20.3%) were judged as partially founded and 9 (6%) as founded. The Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court imposed 28 warnings, 10 reprimands, and 3 temporary suspensions. A total of 68 appeals were submitted, of which 95% were rejected for filing patients. In three instances, unfounded verdicts were changed to two warnings and a reprimand. In four appeals by an orthopedic surgeon, a warning and reprimand were dismissed, and two reprimands were changed to warnings.

CONCLUSIONS

The amount of malpractice cases against orthopedic surgeons in the Netherlands is relatively low. The cases in our study may improve our understanding of allegations against physicians and improve the quality of patient care.

Covid-19: Exploring medico-legal perceptions amongst orthopaedic surgeons and lawyers

INTRODUCTION

British national guidelines and laws published by the British Orthopaedic Association and the new Coronovirus Act 2020 favoured treatment of trauma and orthopaedic conditions with non-operative alternatives.A survey was developed for both lawyers and trauma and orthopaedic clinicians to gauge their perceptions on guidelines related to protection of trauma and orthopaedic staff, and on prosecution with respect to future claims.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixteen questions were designed for surgeons and 11 questions for lawyers. The level of experience and career stages were explored in other questions. A Likert scale (0-5) was used to capture these perceptions.

RESULTS

Clinicians envisaged themselves being less protected (mean = 2.6), forecasted a rise in negligence claims (mean = 3.4) and perceived little additional beneficial indemnity influence from the NHS (mean = 1.8). Lawyers felt that public perception would have more influence in negligence claim rates (mean = 2.6) and disapproved of complete immunity for clinicians (mean = 0.5). Disparities between different trauma and orthopaedic grades demonstrated sentiments of comfort with redeployment, preparedness in non-orthopaedic training and protection from litigation.

DISCUSSION

The results reflected the overall anxiety over litigation reprisal shared amongst trauma and orthopaedic staff. Issues with providing sub-optimal care can worsen this overall fear. Feeling unprotected from litigation reprisal can leave clinicians with an additional sense of emotional and professional burden. Redeployment into unfamiliar environments can leave senior clinicians in limbo in contrast to their juniors.

CONCLUSION

Non-surgical options to treat orthopaedic conditions affect both patients and trauma and orthopaedic staff. Feedback from lawyers reassures trauma and orthopaedic clinicians that negligence claims should not rise due to the updated national guidelines.

Medical Malpractice Among Orthopedic Surgeons in Greece: An Analysis of Court Decisions

Introduction Medical malpractice occurs when a physician, through incorrect medical action or omission, causes the patient to suffer physical harm or loss of life. Orthopedics is a high-risk medical specialty. Orthopedic surgery encompasses a wide range of procedures, including joint replacements, fracture repairs, and spinal surgeries. While orthopedic surgeons strive to provide optimal care to their patients, medical liability claims are a reality they must face. The aim of this study is to analyze the epidemiological data of judicial decisions and cases in Greece for the Specialty of Orthopedics. Material and methods Published court decisions involving medical liabilities of orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists, or only orthopedic surgeons were searched, in the period between 1985 and 2021. The judicial decisions were analyzed by an experienced anesthesiologist and an orthopedic surgeon based on medical knowledge and experience. Patients' age, gender, date of operation and the causes that led to the doctors' persecution were also recorded. Results Seventy court decisions of the first, second, and third degree were found. These decisions related to 34 cases: seven convictions for manslaughter, 18 convictions for bodily harm, and nine acquittals - exempting compensation. They involved 11 men and 13 women. The claims mainly related to intraoperative and postoperative complications in 20 (83.3%) of the 24 cases. Complications in elective spinal and lower extremity surgeries represent 50% (n = 12) of cases, while postoperative complications account for 16.7% of cases (n = 4). Conclusions The present study concluded that an accumulation of experience in large orthopedic centers is needed to improve the performance of orthopedic surgeons during surgery and patient monitoring. Many legal cases are due to the mismatch between patient expectations and the limitations in medicine. Thorough preoperative control and better preoperative communication with the patient are needed, in order to improve the performance of orthopedic surgeons and prevent a significant part of the claims.

The use of deliberate reflection to reduce confirmation bias among orthopedic surgery residents

Introduction: cognitive biases might affect decision-making processes such as clinical reasoning and confirmation bias is among the most important ones. The use of strategies that stimulate deliberate reflection during the diagnostic process seems to reduce availability bias, but its effect in reducing confirmation bias needs to be evaluated.Aims: to examine whether deliberate reflection reduces confirmation bias and increases the diagnostic accuracy of orthopedic residents solving written clinical cases.Methods: experimental study comparing the diagnostic accuracy of orthopedic residents in the resolution of eight written clinical cases containing a referral diagnosis. Half of the written cases had a wrong referral diagnosis. One group of residents used deliberate reflection (RG), which stimulates comparison and contrast of clinical hypotheses in a systematic manner, and a control group (CG), was asked to provide differential diagnoses with no further instruction. The study included 55 third-year orthopedic residents, 27 allocated to the RG and 28 to the CG.Results: residents on the RG had higher diagnostic scores than the CG for clinical cases with a correct referral diagnosis (62.0±20.1 vs. 49.1±21.0 respectively; p = 0.021). For clinical cases with incorrect referral diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy was similar between residents on the RG and those on the CG (39.8±24.3 vs. 44.6±26.7 respectively; p = 0.662). We observed an overall confirmation bias in 26.3% of initial diagnoses (non-analytic phase) and 19.5% of final diagnoses (analytic phase) when solving clinical cases with incorrect referral diagnosis. Residents from RG showed a reduction in confirmation of incorrect referral diagnosis when comparing the initial diagnosis given in the non-analytic phase with the one provided as the final diagnosis (25.9±17.7 vs. 17.6±18.1, respectively; Cohen d: 0.46; p = 0.003). In the CG, the reduction in the confirmation of incorrect diagnosis was not statistically significant.Conclusions: confirmation bias was present when residents solved written clinical cases with incorrect referral diagnoses, and deliberate reflection reduced such bias. Despite the reduction in confirmation bias, diagnostic accuracy of residents from the RG was similar to those from the CG when solving the set of clinical cases with a wrong referral diagnosis.

Malpractice litigation following orthopaedic surgery of the hip: Frequency, reasons for lawsuit, and outcomes

Medical malpractice litigation in the United States has resulted in the widespread adoption of defensive medicine practices. Orthopaedic surgery is among the specialties most likely to face a malpractice lawsuit, and hip-related surgeries are commonly involved. This study aimed to analyse malpractice litigation as it relates to hip surgery in the United States. The purpose of this study was to seek answers to the following questions: Has there been an increase or a decrease in the number of hip surgery malpractice cases in recent years? What are the most common reasons for a patient to pursue litigation? Which surgical complications are most likely to result in a lawsuit? What trends do we see in terms of outcomes? The Westlaw legal database was queried for all relevant cases from 2008 to 2018. A retrospective review of cases was conducted and descriptive analyses were performed in order to identify factors associated with hip surgery malpractice litigation. A total of 82 cases were analysed. There was a downtrend in the number of cases per year. Total hip arthroplasty (47 cases, 57.3%) was the procedure most often involved. Procedural error was noted as a reason for litigation in 71 (86.6%) cases. Neurological injury (22 cases, 26.8%), malpositioned hardware (15 cases, 18.3%) and leg length discrepancy (8 cases, 9.8%) were the most common complications listed. The majority of cases resulted in a verdict in favour of the defendant orthopaedic surgeon (48 cases, 58.5%). The mean payout for a plaintiff verdict (20 cases, 24.4%) was $1,647,981 (range, $1,852-$7,000,000) and the mean payout for a settlement (13 cases, 15.9%) was $657,823 (range, $49,000-$3,000,000) (p = 0.063). The study concluded that, within the 10-year period, there was a significant downtrend in hip surgery malpractice cases filed per year. Orthopaedic surgeons were found liable in the minority of cases. As expected, verdicts in favour of plaintiffs resulted in seemingly higher payouts than settlements.

Malpractice trends in shoulder and elbow surgery

BACKGROUND

Medical malpractice is a very common occurrence that many medical providers will have to face; approximately 17,000 medical malpractice cases are filed in the United States each year, and more than 99% of all surgeons are faced with at least 1 instance of malpractice litigation throughout their careers. Malpractice litigation also carries a major economic weight, with medical malpractice spending resulting in an aggregate expenditure of nearly $60 billion annually in the United States. Orthopedic surgery is one of the most common subspecialties involved in malpractice claims. Currently, there are no comprehensive studies examining malpractice lawsuits within shoulder and elbow surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to examine trends in malpractice claims in shoulder and elbow surgery.

METHODS

The Westlaw online legal database was queried in order to identify state and federal jury verdicts and settlements pertaining to shoulder and elbow surgery from 2010-2020. Only cases involving medical malpractice in which an orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgeon was a named defendant were included for analysis. All available details pertaining to the cases were collected. This included plaintiff demographic and geographic data. Details regarding the cases were also collected, such as anatomic location, pathology, complications, and case outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-five malpractice lawsuits pertaining to orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery were identified. Most plaintiffs in these cases were adult men, and the majority of cases were filed in the Southwest (28%) and Midwest (28%) regions of the United States. The most common anatomic region involved in claims was the rotator cuff (32%), followed by the glenohumeral joint (20%). The majority of these claims involved surgery (56%). Pain of mechanical nature was the most common complication seen in claims (56%). The jury ruled in favor of the defendant surgeon in most cases (80%).

DISCUSSION

This is the first study that comprehensively examines the full scope of orthopedic shoulder and elbow malpractice claims across the United States. The most common complaint that plaintiffs reported at the time of litigation was residual pain after treatment due to a mechanical etiology, followed by complaints of nerve damage. A large portion of claims resulted after nonoperative treatment. A better understanding of the trends within malpractice claims is crucial to developing strategies for prevention.

Systematic review of the factors and the key indicators that identify doctors at risk of complaints, malpractice claims or impaired performance

OBJECTIVE

To identify the risk factors associated with complaints, malpractice claims and impaired performance in medical practitioners.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid-Medline, Ovid Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 2011 until March 2020. Reference lists and Google were also handsearched.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven peer-reviewed papers and three grey literature publications from 2011 to March 2020 were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers. Twenty-three key factors identified, which were categorised as demographic or workplace related. Gender, age, years spent in practice and greater number of patient lists were associated with higher risk of malpractice claim or complaint. Risk factors associated with physician impaired performance included substance abuse and burn-out.

CONCLUSIONS

It is likely that risk factors are interdependent with no single factor as a strong predictor of a doctor's risk to the public. Risk factors for malpractice claim or complaint are likely to be country specific due to differences in governance structures, processes and funding. Risk factors for impaired performance are likely to be specialty specific due to differences in work culture and access to substances. New ways of supporting doctors might be developed, using risk factor data to reduce adverse events and patient harm.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020182045.

Never events in orthopaedics: A nationwide data analysis and guidance on preventative measures

BACKGROUND

Never Events (NE) are serious clinical incidents that are wholly preventable if appropriate institutional safeguards are in place and followed. They are often used as a surrogate of the quality of healthcare delivered by an institution. Most NEs are surgical and orthopaedic surgery is one of the most involved specialties.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify common NE themes associated with orthopaedics within the National Health Service (NHS) of England.

METHOD

We conducted an observational study analysing the annual NE data published by the NHS England from 2012 to 2020 to collate all orthopaedic surgery-related NE and construct relevant recurring themes.

RESULTS

We identified 460 orthopaedic NE out of a total of 3247 (14.16%) reported NE to NHS England. There were 206 Wrong implants/prostheses under 8 different themes. Wrong hip and knee prosthesis were the commonest "wrong implants" (n = 94; 45.63% and n = 91; 44.17% respectively). There were 197 "Wrong-site surgery" incidents in 22 different themes. The commonest of these was the laterality problems accounting for 64 (32.48%) incidents followed by 63 (31.97%) incidents of wrong spinal level interventions. There were 18 (9.13%) incidents of intervention on the wrong patients and 17 (8.62%) wrong incisions. Retained pieces of instruments were the commonest retained foreign body with 15 (26.13%) incidents. The next categories were retained drill parts and retained instruments with 13 (22.80%) incidents each.

CONCLUSION

We identified 47 different themes of NE specific to orthopaedic surgery. Awareness of these themes would help in their prevention. Site marking can be challenging in the presence of cast and on operating on the digits and spine. Addition of a Real-time intra-operative implant scan to the National Joint Registry can avoid wrong implant selection while Fiducial markers, intraoperative imaging, O-arm navigation, and second time-out could help prevent wrong level spinal surgery.

Confidence level, challenges, and obstacles faced by orthopedic residents in obtaining informed consent

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to evaluate the opinions of orthopedic residents on current practices, experiences, training, confidence level, difficulties, and challenges faced when obtaining informed consent.

DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional, multi-center, and questionnaire-based study.

SETTING

The study was done in forty-four training centers across Saudi Arabia.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 313 orthopedic residents participated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The web-based questionnaire examined the perceptions of residents regarding practices, experience, training, difficulties, and challenges surrounding the obtention of informed consent, as well as residents' confidence in obtaining informed consent for different orthopedic situations and eight common orthopedic procedures.

RESULTS

Most residents were allowed to obtain consent independently for all emergency, trauma, primary, and revision cases at their institution (92.7%). Only 33.5% of the residents received formal training and teaching on obtaining informed consent, with 67.1% having believed that they needed more training. Only 4.2% of the residents routinely disclosed all essential information of informed consent to patients. Inadequate knowledge (86.3%) and communication barriers (84.7%) were the most reported difficulties. Generally, 77.3% of the residents described their confidence level in obtaining informed consent as good or adequate, and 33.9% were confident to discuss all key components of the informed consent. Residents' confidence level to independently obtain informed consent decreased with procedure complexity. Receiving formal training, senior level (postgraduate year (PGY) 4 and 5), and being frequently involved in obtaining informed consent correlated with increased confidence level.

CONCLUSION

Many residents incompletely disclosed key information upon obtaining informed consent and reported lacking confidence in their ability to perform the procedure in their daily practices. To improve patient care and residents' performance and overcome these difficulties and challenges, institutions should develop effective strategies to standardize the informed consent process, provide formal training for obtaining informed consent, and provide supervision for residents during obtention of informed consent.

A Five-Year Survey for Plastic Surgery Malpractice Claims in Rome, Italy

(1) Introduction: Medical malpractice claims against both health institutions and physicians are a crucial topic in Italy, as well as in other countries, particularly regarding civil proceedings. Our study reports an analysis of all of the malpractice judgments concerning plastic surgery decided in the Civil Court of Rome between 2012 and 2016. (2) Methods: the database of the Observatory Project on Medical Responsibility (ORMe) was analyzed, which collects all of the judgments of the Civil Court of Rome, that is, the first instance district court. Therefore, neither the jurisprudence of the second level court nor that of the Supreme Court was taken into account. (3) Results: 144 judgments concerning plastic surgery were delivered in the five-year period of 2012–2016 (corresponding to 10.6% of total professional liability verdicts of the Civil Court of Rome in the same period). In 101/144 cases (70.14%), the claim was accepted. A total of €4,727,579.00 was paid in compensation for plastic surgery malpractice claims, with a range from a minimum amount of €1555.96 to a maximum amount of €1,425,155.00 and an average compensation of €46,807.71 per claim that was significantly lower compared to other surgical disciplines. (4) Conclusions: Our data confirm that the analyzed branch has a high litigation rate, with a prevalence of convictions for cosmetic procedures over reconstructive ones, both for malpractice and for violation of the informed consent. Plastic surgery is also confirmed among those branches in which the professionals are more frequently sued compared to health institutions.

Characteristics of the medical malpractice cases against orthopedists in China between 2016 and 2017

Background

This study aimed to identify the most frequent reasons for orthopedic medical malpractice, gain insight into the related patient demographics and clinical characteristics, and identify the independent factors associated with it.

Methods

We collected and analyzed the demographic and injury characteristics, hospital levels and treatments, medical errors, and orthopedist’s degree of responsibility for the patients who were subject to orthopedic medical malpractice at our institution. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with the orthopedist’s degree of responsibility in the medical malpractice cases.

Results

We included 1922 cases of medical malpractice in the final analysis. There were 1195 and 727 men and women, respectively (62.2% and 37.8%, respectively). Of the total patients, 1810, 1038, 1558, 1441, and 414 patients (94.2%, 54.0%, 81.1%, 75.0%, and 21.5%, respectively) were inpatients, had closed injuries, underwent surgery, were trauma cases, and had preoperative comorbidities, respectively. Most medical malpractice cases were in patients with fractures and spinal degenerative disease (1229 and 253 cases; 63.9% and 13.2%, respectively), and occurred in city-level hospitals (1006 cases, 52.3%), which were located in the eastern part of china (1001, 52.1%), including Jiangsu and Zhejiang (279 and 233 cases, 14.52% and 52.1%, respectively). Between 2016 and 2017, the orthopedist’s degree of responsibility in medical malpractice claims were deemed as full, primary, equal, secondary, and minor in 135, 654, 77, 716, and 340 orthopedists (7.0%, 34.0%, 4.0%, 37.3%, and 17.7%). Most medical errors made by orthopedists in cases of medical malpractice were related to failure to supervise or monitor cases, improper performance of procedures, and failure to instruct or communicate with the patient (736, 716, and 423 cases; 38.3%, 37.3%, and 22.0%, respectively). The multivariate analysis found that patients with preoperative comorbidities, who sustained humerus injuries, who were aged ≥65 years, who were treated by doctors who failed to supervise or monitor them, and who were treated at the provincial and city level hospitals were more likely to claim that the orthopedist bore a serious degree of responsibility in the medical malpractice case.

Conclusions

Our results provide detailed information on the plaintiff demographics, clinical characteristics, and factors associated with medical malpractice. Medical malpractice is related to poor treatment outcomes. The first preventative measure that is required is a comprehensive improvement in the medical staff quality, mainly through medical ethics cultivation, and professional ability and technique training. Additionally, failure to supervise or monitor cases was the leading cause of medical malpractice and one of the factors that led to orthopedists bearing an equal and higher responsibility for medical malpractice. Orthopedists should improve patient supervision, especially when treating older patients and those with preoperative comorbidities and humerus injuries.

Litigations in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: analysis and outcomes of medicolegal claims during the last 10 years in the United Kingdom National Health Service

This study analyses the outcomes of litigation claims in trauma and orthopaedic surgery between 2008/2009 and 2018/2019.

Utilizing a formal request to the NHS Resolution under the Freedom of Information Act, the data related to claims against orthopaedic surgery were obtained. A total of 8548 claims were analysed and re-grouped to perform a meaningful analysis for the type of claims and the type of injuries.

The total pay-out cost for the settled claims was over £1.2 billion. The most common types of claims were related to mismanagement (39.0%), diagnostic issues (17.6%), perioperative issues (15.9%) and alleged incompetence (10.2%). The most common primary causes for claims were patients’ dissatisfaction (52.2%), damage to the limbs (19.0%) and neurological injuries (9.2%).

The highest amounts of damages paid out were related to patients’ dissatisfaction (37.7%), burns and bruising (31.0%), neurological injuries (24.5%) and damage to the limbs (22.3%). The number of claims and the pay-out cost were found to be steadily increasing; however, there was a slightly declining trend observed during the last two years.

The cost of litigation continues to have a significant financial impact on the NHS. The recent declining trend is encouraging; however, surgeons need to take consistent diligent steps to avoid preventable causes that lead to litigation claims.

The proposed change in the coding system of claims in the NHS Resolution will not only help to formulate a clear classification system but will also improve the learning from previous experience.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:152-159. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200100

Claims in orthopedic foot/ankle surgery, how can they help to improve quality of care? A retrospective claim analysis

Background

Orthopedic foot/ankle surgery is a high risk specialty when it comes to malpractice claims. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, characteristics and outcome of claims in this area.

Methods

This was a retrospective, 10-year claim analysis, with data from an anonymous database. Baseline claim/claimant characteristics were collected from all orthopedic foot/ankle-related cases.

Results

Of 460 claims in total, most were related to delay in/wrong diagnosis or to (complications of) elective surgical procedures. Whether a claim was settled was related to type of injury (fracture) and type of claim (diagnostic mistake). Median amount disbursed in settled claims was €12,549. Claim incidence did not increase over the years.

Conclusion

Missed fracture diagnosis and “failed”/disappointing results of elective surgical procedures were the most common causes for claims. Sufficient knowledge of missed (foot) fractures and clear communication/expectation management before elective procedures could help to improve quality of healthcare and patient satisfaction.