Spine neurosurgeons facing the judicialization of their profession: disenchantment and alteration of daily practice-a qualitative study

Background

The judicialization of medicine can lead to professional disenchantment and defensive attitudes among surgeons. Some quantitative studies have investigated this topic in spine surgery, but none has provided direct thematic feedback from physicians. This qualitative study aimed to identify the impact of this phenomenon in the practice of spine neurosurgeons.

Methods

We proposed a qualitative study using grounded theory approach. Twenty-three purposively selected private neurosurgeons participated. Inclusion took place until data saturation was reached. Data were collected through individual interviews and analyzed thematically and independently by three researchers (an anthropologist, a psychiatrist, and a neurosurgeon).

Results

Data analysis identified five superordinate themes that were based on items that recurred in interviews: (1) private practice of spinal surgery (high-risk surgery based on frequent functional symptoms, in an unfavorable medicolegal context); (2) societal transformation of the doctor-patient relationship (new societal demands, impact of the internet and social network); (3) judicialization of spine surgery (surgeons’ feelings about the frequency and motivation of the complaints they receive, and their own management of them); (4) coping strategies (identification and solutions for “at risk” situations and patients); and (5) professional disenchantment (impact of these events on surgeons’ daily practice and career planning). Selected quotes of interviews were reported to support these findings.

Conclusions

Our study highlights several elements that can alter the quality of care in a context of societal change and the judicialization of medicine. The alteration of the doctor-patient relationship and the permanent pressure of a possible complaint encourage surgeons to adopt defensive attitudes in order to minimize the risks of litigation and increased insurance premiums. These phenomena can affect the quality of care and the privacy of physicians to the extent that they may consider changing or interrupting their careers earlier.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00701-020-04302-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Men's view on participation in decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening: patient and public involvement in development of a survey

Background

Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) may prevent some cancer deaths, but also may miss some cancers or lead to unnecessary and potentially harmful treatment. Therefore, involving patients in decision-making about PSA screening is recommended. However, we know little about the attitude of men regarding participation in decisions about PSA screening and how to assess such attitudes. The purpose of this paper is to describe patient and public participation in the development of a national, web-based case vignette survey for studying men’s view on participation in decision-making about PSA screening.

Methods

The project group developed a first draft plan for the survey, its vignettes and choice of measurements. This included multiple vignette variants representing various levels of patient participation in decision-making about PSA screening with different outcomes. Additionally, it included questions on respondents’ satisfaction with imagined courses of health care, their propensity to initiate a malpractice complaint, their own health care experiences, socio-demography, personality, and preferences for control regarding health care decision-making. Following feedback from a workshop with academic peers on the draft plan, a group of 30 adult men was engaged to help develop case vignette versions and questionnaire items by providing feedback on structure, comprehension, response patterns, and time required to complete the survey. Furthermore, a panel of three patients with PCa experience was assembled to assist development through a separate review-and-feedback process.

Results

Based on reviews of survey drafts, the large group made further suggestions about construction of the survey (e.g. clarification and modification of case vignette versions, deletion of items and adjustment of wording, instructions to guide respondents, replacement of technical terms, and optimization of sequence of survey elements). The patient panel ensured fine-tuning of vignette versions and questionnaire items and helped review the internet version of the survey.

Conclusions

Patient and public involvement during various phases of the survey development helped modify and refine survey structure and content. The survey exemplifies a way to measure health care users’ satisfaction with imagined courses of health care and wish to complain, taking into account their characteristics.

Patients' knowledge and perceived reactions to medical errors in a tertiary health facility in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Human errors in healthcare delivery pose serious threats to patients undergoing treatment. While clinical concern is growing in response, there is need to report social and behavioural context of the problem in Nigeria.

OBJECTIVE

To examine patients' knowledge and perceived reactions to medical errors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect data from 269 in-patients and 10 In-Depth Interviews were conducted among health caregivers in the University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.

RESULTS

Majority (64.5%) of respondents reported annoyance and disappointment with medical errors. Severity of error (88.5%) and the perception of negligence mediated intention to litigate. Voluntary disclosure significantly reduced patients' intention to litigate caregivers (chi(2)=3.584; df=1; P=0.053). Frustration/anger was not more likely to influence patient to litigate than feelings of resignation/forgiveness (chi(2)=2.156; df=1; P>.05). Financial difficulties arising from error had an important influence on litigation. Health caregivers admitted possibility of errors; and insisted that although notifying patients/relatives about errors is appropriate, disclosure was dependent on the seriousness, health implications and the causes.

CONCLUSION

Voluntary disclosure and teamwork is very important in dealing with medical error. The role of medical social workers could be important in the discourse and disclosure of medical error.

Malpractice litigation and nursing home quality of care

OBJECTIVE

To assess the potential deterrent effect of nursing home litigation threat on nursing home quality.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

We use a panel dataset of litigation claims and Nursing Home Online Survey Certification and Reporting (OSCAR) data from 1995 to 2005 in six states: Florida, Illinois, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Missouri, and Delaware, for a total of 2,245 facilities. Claims data are from Westlaw's Adverse Filings database, a proprietary legal database, on all malpractice, negligence, and personal injury/wrongful death claims filed against nursing facilities.

STUDY DESIGN

A lagged 2-year moving average of the county-level number of malpractice claims is used to represent the threat of litigation. We use facility fixed-effects models to examine the relationship between the threat of litigation and nursing home quality.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We find significant increases in registered nurse-to-total staffing ratios in response to rising malpractice threat, and a reduction in pressure sores among highly staffed facilities. However, the magnitude of the deterrence effect is small.

CONCLUSIONS

Deterrence in response to the threat of malpractice litigation is unlikely to lead to widespread improvements in nursing home quality. This should be weighed against other benefits and costs of litigation to assess the net benefit of tort reform.

Ischemic hypoxic encephalopathy: The role of MRI of neonatal injury and medico-legal implication

Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy is one of the major causes of neonatal death and neurological disability in the child, and represents the most common birth injury claim. Intrapartum asphyxia often leads to several long-term sequalae, such as cerebral palsy and/or developmental delay, epilepsy. Through the neuroimaging it's possible to identify and define the different lesioned pictures and provide useful elements to establish the moment in which the damage occurred; indeed, timing of injury is a key element in the legal arena. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is emerging as one of the most important tools in identifying the etiologic of neonatal encephalopathy as well as in predicting long-term outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate all MRI tests performed in a group of infants and young patients with possible neonatal encephalopathy, in order to determine the role of MRI in perinatal hypoxic-ischemic damage and the specific patterns that can point towards a diagnosis of the time of the damage's onset. Another goal is to assess the role of MRI in cases subject to legal-medical ligation. Since the advent of hypothermic neuroprotection, new malpractice allegations have arisen, including the failure to initiate cooling in a timely manner. In all cases, documentation of the status of the baby at birth, including a thorough neurologic exam, can be extremely helpful to the later defence of a malpractice claim, which might occur years later.

Impact of malpractice liability among spine surgeons: A national survey of French private neurosurgeons

PURPOSE

In the general context of medical judicialization, spine surgeons are impacted by the part that medical responsibility and the risk of malpractice play in their actions and decisions. Our aim was to evaluate possible shifts in practices among private neurosurgeons who are highly exposed to this judicial risk and detect alterations in their pleasure in exercising their profession. We present the first national survey on French physicians' perception of surgical judicialization and consequences on their practice.

METHODS

An online survey was submitted to the 121 members of the French Society of Private Neurosurgery, who represent 29.1% of the total number of spine surgeons and perform 36.0% of the national total spine surgery activity. The French law (no-fault out-of-court scheme) significantly impacts these surgeons in the event of litigation.

RESULTS

A total of 78 surveys were completed (64.5% response rate): 89.7% of respondents experienced alteration of doctor-patient relationship related to judicialization and 60.2% had already refused to perform risky surgeries. Fear of being sued added negative pressure during surgery for 55.1% of respondents and 37.2% of them had already considered stopping their practice because of this litigation context.

CONCLUSION

The increasing impact of medical liability is prompting practitioners to change their practice and perceptions. The doctor-patient relationship appears to be altered, negative pressure is placed on physicians and defensively, some neurosurgeons may refuse high-risk patients and procedures. This situation causes professional disenchantment and can ultimately prove disadvantageous for both doctors and patients.

Claims and compensation for complications resulting from blood transfusions in China from 1998 to 2013

The purpose of this study was to find causes, outcomes, and trends in malpractice litigation involving blood transfusions in China. This study examines 108 claims resulting from transfusion-related complications over a period of 15 years. The primary outcomes associated with these claims included transfusion-transmitted infection (98 cases, 90.8%), transfusion reactions (nine cases, 8.3%), and failures to obtain informed consent (one case, 0.9%). The specialty of obstetrics and gynecology was more likely to be accepted in judgment. As the supreme status of law, Blood Donation Law plays an important role in the blood safety, which results in less HCV infection cases occurred after 1998. Though the 2002 and 2010's rules give opposite liability principle, the fault liability and no-fault liability, the statistics shows that rules do not have an effect on different liabilities in judicial practice. The current study concludes that the risk of serious adverse transfusion reactions may be significantly increased by unnecessary transfusions.

Judicial Precedent-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines of Propofol in Sedative Esthetic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Propofol is has been widely used for sedation in the field of esthetic surgery because of its favorable pharmacokinetic profile. Propofol sedation-induced side effects are rare. However, when present, they can be serious. The number of malpractice claims associated with propofol sedation has increased in recent years. This study aims to show which procedures lead to the most claims in the field of esthetic surgery through a review of Korean precedents.

METHODS

Thirteen precedent cases of propofol sedation in the field of esthetic surgery were collected between 2000 and 2016. We analyzed the type of procedure, administration route, anesthesia provider, complications, timing of damaging events, average indemnification, plaintiff's (patients) winning rate, ratio and the reason of limitation of liability and the key factors affecting the judgement in these cases.

RESULTS

Most plaintiffs were women, and in most cases (11/13, 73.3%), the times of the damaging events were in maintenance and the anesthesia provider was the surgeon. The most common complication related to propofol sedation was hypoxic brain damage. Among the 13 cases, 12 were won by the plaintiff. The mean claim settlement was 339,455,814 KRW (USD 301,792.15). The key factors affecting the judgement were administration method and staff, monitoring method, preparation of emergency kit, response to emergencies, transfer to a higher-level hospital, detailed medical recording about event and informed consent.

CONCLUSION

The number of claims owing to propofol sedation after esthetic surgery is increasing. Close monitoring during the operation, immediate reaction to an event and thorough medical records were main key factors that influenced the judgement. Preoperative explanation about the possibility of complications was important. The findings will help surgeons achieve high patient satisfaction and reduce liability concerns.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Standard of anesthesia care: possible dissociation from recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines

A medical malpractice lawsuit may be brought against health care providers, if there was a possibility of a negligence, or failure to meet the standard of care. Recently, clinical practice guidelines have increasingly been used as evidence of the standard of care. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether these guidelines can be used as evidence of the standard of care. We carried out a snapshot study to know whether or not there were dissociations between the current standard of anesthesia care and recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines. We asked all the 80 heads of Anesthesiology departments of Japanese public and private Universities, to answer questions related to difficult airway management after induction of anesthesia, postoperative monitoring of breathing, and of the presence or the absence of neuropathy of the lower legs after regional anesthesia. The response rate was 71% (57/80). The majority of anesthesiologists had little experience with front-of-neck access in patient, and responders might frequently make repeated attempts at tracheal intubation. Postoperative monitoring was frequently not routinely performed. In conclusion, this study has shown that there may be various degrees of dissociations between the current standard of anesthesia care and the recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines that had been used as evidence of the standard of care in medical malpractice lawsuit cases in Japan.

Malpractice litigation in diagnostic radiology with special focus on cases in the abdomen and pelvis: A comprehensive analysis from a national legal database

OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic radiology is regarded as a "high-risk" specialty in the medical malpractice literature. This study examines the causes and patterns and types of medical malpractice litigation and outcomes in radiology in the United States, with a particular focus on diagnostic radiology errors involving the abdomen and pelvis.

METHODS

Malpractice suits in which the defendant was a radiologist in the United States from 2008 to 2018 were identified using LexisAdvance, a national legal database. 2775 cases were initially identified, and 1165 cases fit the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Diagnostic error was the most prevalent error type, (n = 925, 82.9 %), followed by procedural errors (n = 106, 9.5 %), communication errors (66 cases, 5.9 %), and mixed/other errors (n = 19, 1.7 %). Breast was the most common imaging modality implicated in medical error (n = 211, 26.4 % of total cases), followed by CT (n = 186, 23.3 %), and XR (n = 146, 18.3 %). Out-of-court settlement was the most common outcome (n = 402, 44.5 %), followed by a verdict ruled in favor of the defendant (n = 246, 27.2 %) and case dismissal (n = 131, 14.5 %). The average award in a settlement was $1,500,690 USD (range: $25,000- $10,200,000 USD). The average award in a jury verdict for the plaintiff was $2,857,203 USD (range: $60,000- $31,490,000 USD), and the average award in arbitration for the plaintiff was $1,354,497 USD (range: $200,000- $2,800,000 USD). The gastrointestinal (GI) system and the genitourinary (GU) system accounted for 51.9 % and 25.9 % of errors in the abdomen and pelvis, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Diagnostic error was the most prevalent source of error leading to malpractice litigation. Breast imaging was the most frequently implicated imaging modality in litigations, followed closely by CT and XR. A majority of cases were resolved through out-of-court settlement or with judgments in favor of the defendant radiologists. However, in cases with trial judgments in favor of the plaintiff, average financial awards were higher than out-of-court settlements. Abdomen and pelvic involvement accounted for frequent sources of error.