An Updated Analysis of Body Contouring Malpractice Cases.

INTRODUCTION: Body contouring procedures are commonly performed in the United States for patients seeking to sculpt specific areas of their bodies. The aim of this study was to provide an updated analysis of the factors that influence medical malpractice litigation surrounding body contouring surgery. METHODS: The following terms were used to search the Westlaw Campus Legal research Database for cases with earliest documentation after January 2013: ("contouring" OR "abdominoplasty" OR "liposuction" OR "tummy tuck" OR "body lift" OR "thigh lift" OR "arm lift" OR "brachioplasty" OR "thighplasty" OR "lipectomy" OR "panniculectomy") AND "surgery" AND "medical malpractice." Cases were only included if there was a complaint of medical malpractice subsequent to a body contouring procedure, and details of the cases were provided. Information was collected on the location of the lawsuit, the earliest year of available case documentation, patient demographics, procedure(s) performed, alleged injury, specialty involvement, and verdicts. RESULTS: A total of 32 cases were included in the study. Most of the patients involved in the cases were women (n = 30, 93.8%) and alive (n = 28, 87.5%). New York state had the most cases (n = 7, 21.9%). Abdominoplasty (56.3%), liposuction (53.1%), and buttock augmentations (15.6%) were the most common procedures. Plastic surgeons were involved in 93.8% (n = 30) of the cases, and anesthesia, emergency medicine, dermatology, and oncology were also involved. Claims of malpractice most often discussed negligent technique (71.9%) and poor postoperative management (62.5%). Common postoperative complications were infection/sepsis (40.6%), scarring (31.3%), and emotional distress/prolonged pain (31.3%). One available ruling was in favor of the plaintiff. CONCLUSION: Although many of the cases in this analysis cited negligent technique, none were founded in their argument. Because involvement in these cases can place a burden on attending physicians, clear expectations of postoperative infections, scarring, and prolonged pain should be addressed during the informed consent process.

Assessment of Claimant, Clinical, and Financial Characteristics of Teleradiology Medical Malpractice Cases.

Background The increasing use of teleradiology has been accompanied by concerns relating to risk management and patient safety. Purpose To compare characteristics of teleradiology and nonteleradiology radiology malpractice cases and identify contributing factors underlying these cases. Materials and Methods In this retrospective analysis, a national database of medical malpractice cases was queried to identify cases involving telemedicine that closed between January 2010 and March 2022. Teleradiology malpractice cases were identified based on manual review of cases in which telemedicine was coded as one of the contributing factors. These cases were compared with nonteleradiology cases that closed during the same time period in which radiology had been determined to be the primary responsible clinical service. Claimant, clinical, and financial characteristics of the cases were recorded, and continuous or categorical data were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test or Fisher exact test, respectively. Results This study included 135 teleradiology and 3474 radiology malpractices cases. The death of a patient occurred more frequently in teleradiology cases (48 of 135 [35.6%]) than in radiology cases (685 of 3474 [19.7%]; P < .001). Cerebrovascular disease was a more common final diagnosis in the teleradiology cases (13 of 135 [9.6%]) compared with the radiology cases (124 of 3474 [3.6%]; P = .002). Problems with communication among providers was a more frequent contributing factor in the teleradiology cases (35 of 135 [25.9%]) than in the radiology cases (439 of 3474 [12.6%]; P < .001). Teleradiology cases were more likely to close with indemnity payment (79 of 135 [58.5%]) than the radiology cases (1416 of 3474 [40.8%]; P < .001) and had a higher median indemnity payment than the radiology cases ($339 230 [IQR, $120 790-$731 615] vs $214 063 [IQR, $66 620-$585 424]; P = .01). Conclusion Compared with radiology cases, teleradiology cases had higher clinical and financial severity and were more likely to involve issues with communication. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Mezrich in this issue.

A machine learning-based predictive model of causality in orthopaedic medical malpractice cases in China.

PURPOSE: To explore the feasibility and validity of machine learning models in determining causality in medical malpractice cases and to try to increase the scientificity and reliability of identification opinions. METHODS: We collected 13,245 written judgments from PKULAW.COM, a public database. 963 cases were included after the initial screening. 21 medical and ten patient factors were selected as characteristic variables by summarising previous literature and cases. Random Forest, eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM) were used to establish prediction models of causality for the two data sets, respectively. Finally, the optimal model is obtained by hyperparameter tuning of the six models. RESULTS: We built three real data set models and three virtual data set models by three algorithms, and their confusion matrices differed. XGBoost performed best in the real data set, with a model accuracy of 66%. In the virtual data set, the performance of XGBoost and LightGBM was basically the same, and the model accuracy rate was 80%. The overall accuracy of external verification was 72.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal model of this study is expected to predict the causality accurately.

One thought too few: An adaptive rationale for punishing negligence.

Why do we punish negligence? Some current accounts raise the possibility that it can be explained by the kinds of processes that lead us to punish ordinary harmful acts, such as outcome bias, character inference, or antecedent deliberative choices. Although they capture many important cases, these explanations fail to account for others. We argue that, in addition to these phenomena, there is something unique to the punishment of negligence itself: People hold others directly responsible for the basic fact of failing to bring to mind information that would help them to avoid important risks. In other words, we propose that at its heart negligence is a failure of thought. Drawing on the current literature in moral psychology, we suggest that people find it natural to punish such failures, even when they do not arise from conscious, volitional choice. This raises a question: Why punish somebody for a mental event they did not exercise deliberative control over? Drawing on the literature on how thoughts come to mind, we argue that punishing a person for such failures will help prevent their future occurrence, even without the involvement of volitional choice. This provides new insight on the structure and function of our tendency to punish negligent actions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

Patients' Suits Against Psychiatrists for Not Preventing the Patients' Criminal Acts.

Patients who allege negligent treatment by their psychiatrists can sue to be compensated for the harms they experience. But what if the harms result from a criminal act committed by the patient that the patient claims the psychiatrist should have prevented? A long-standing common law rule bars plaintiffs from being compensated for harms caused by their own wrongdoing. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently considered the scope of this rule in the case of a psychiatric patient convicted of murder. Even when the rule is upheld, various exceptions may exist, and there is pressure to do away with an absolute bar on recovery of damages.

Characteristics and contributing factors of diagnostic error in surgery: analysis of closed medico-legal cases and complaints in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors lead to patient harm; however, most research has been conducted in nonsurgical disciplines. We sought to characterize diagnostic error in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative surgical phases, describe their contributing factors, and quantify their impact related to patient harm. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of closed medico-legal cases and complaints using a database representing more than 95% of all Canadian physicians. We included cases if they involved a legal action or complaint that closed between 2014 and 2018 and involved a diagnostic error assigned by peer expert review to a surgeon. RESULTS: We identified 387 surgical cases that involved a diagnostic error. The surgical specialties most often associated with diagnostic error were general surgery (n = 151, 39.0%), gynecology (n = 71, 18.3%), and orthopedic surgery (n = 48, 12.4%), but most surgical specialties were represented. Errors occurred more often in the postoperative phase (n = 171, 44.2%) than in the pre- (n = 127, 32.8%) or intra-operative (n = 120, 31.0%) phases of surgical care. More than 80% of the contributing factors for diagnostic errors were related to providers, with clinical decision-making being the principal contributing factor. Half of the contributing factors were related to the health care team (n = 194, 50.1%), the most common of which was communication breakdown. More than half of patients involved in a surgical diagnostic error experienced at least moderate harm, with 1 in 7 cases resulting in death. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, diagnostic errors occurred in most surgical disciplines and across all surgical phases of care; contributing factors were commonly attributed to provider clinical decision-making and communication breakdown. Surgical patient safety efforts should include diagnostic errors with a focus on understanding and reducing errors in surgical clinical decision-making and improving communication.

Ethical Expert Witness Testimony.

Forensic nurses are routinely called upon to provide expert consultation and witness testimony. Nearly half of the enumerated standards in the Forensic Nursing Scope and Standards of Practice reference competencies directly related or complementary to ethical testimony. Requests from the field, coupled with the increasing opportunities for forensic nurses to serve as expert witnesses, necessitate the development of clear parameters for ethical expert witness testimony.

Clinical negligence: should the NHS consider a no-fault system?

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, considers recent discussions and recommendations to review the current compensation scheme.

Anesthesia Liability Related to Pre-existing Conditions.

In 1985, the American Society of Anesthesiologists initiated a quality improvement closed claims analysis project for anesthetic injury to elevate patient safety. To date, there have been a total of 8954 documented claims, describing injuries contracted under sedation, regional anesthesia, or failure to attend to a patient's post-operative needs. The Closed Claims database reveals that the most highly documented health care complications were a loss of life at 2%, nerve injuries at 2%, and damage to the brain at 9%. The highest documented cases of damage from anesthesia involved regional-block-related events at 20%, followed by respiratory-related adverse effects at 17%, cardiovascular-related events at 13%, together with apparatus-linked events at 10%. Injury may result from several causes. First, multiple techniques and interventions are used during surgery, and all have potential adverse effects. Additionally, many patients scheduled for surgery have extensive past medical histories and medical comorbidities, thereby increasing their baseline risk for injury. From the Closed Claims database, improved evaluation of clinical-related implications linked to injuries within the handling of airway, sedation, non-operational room locales, obstetric anesthesia, along with chronic pain management. In summary, anesthesia departments should review outcomes of their patients on a routine basis. Assessing factors when an adverse outcome occurs may allow for changes in techniques or other anesthesia considerations to help lessen or prevent future complications.

Scalding saline injuries: Preventing a rare but serious event in medical litigation.

This study aimed to investigate the causes, outcomes, and compensation amounts of saline-induced perioperative burns, a rare but entirely preventable event. Saline-induced burns pose a significant risk to patients, and understanding the factors associated with such incidents is crucial for improving patient safety. Previous studies highlighted the use of hot saline bags and solution during medical procedures as a potential cause of these burns. A retrospective analysis of cases involving perioperative saline-induced burns was conducted using the Westlaw and Lexis Nexis legal databases. Eight relevant cases were identified and analyzed to determine the causes, outcomes, and compensation amounts. Hot saline bags used for positioning and hot saline solution were identified as the primary causes of saline-induced burns. Out of the eight cases analyzed, four resulted in a favorable verdict for the plaintiff, three cases were settled, and one case was in favor of the defense. Compensation amounts ranged from no monetary compensation to over one million dollars. This study highlights the need for increased awareness among medical professionals regarding the risks associated with saline-induced burns, and the importance of implementing guidelines for the safe use of hot saline bags and solution. Together these measures can hopefully mitigate the occurrence of these preventable incidents, improve patient safety, and reduce medicolegal exposure.

Examining the variation in consent in general surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Consent is a fundamental aspect of surgery and expectations around the consent process have changed following the Montgomery vs Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) court ruling. This study aimed to identify trends in litigation pertaining to consent, explore variation in how consent is practised among general surgeons and identify potential causes of this variation. METHODS: This mixed-methods study examined temporal variation in litigation rates relating to consent (between 2011 and 2020), using data obtained from National Health Service (NHS) Resolutions. Semi-structured clinician interviews were then conducted to gain qualitative data regarding how general surgeons take consent, their ideologies and their outlook on the recent legal changes. The quantitative component included a questionnaire survey aiming to explore these issues with a larger population to improve the generalisability of the findings. RESULTS: NHS Resolutions litigation data showed a significant increase in litigation pertaining to consent following the 2015 health board ruling. The interviews demonstrated considerable variation in how surgeons approach consent. This was corroborated by the survey, which illustrated considerable variation in how consent is documented when different surgeons are presented with the same case vignette. CONCLUSION: A clear increase in litigation relating to consent was seen in the post-Montgomery era, which may be due to legal precedent being established and increased awareness of these issues. Findings from this study demonstrate variability in the information patients receive. In some cases, consent practices did not adequately meet current regulations and therefore are susceptible to potential litigation. This study identifies areas for improvement in the practice of consent.

Understanding Factors Associated with Paid Malpractice Claims in Plastic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated malpractice broadly in the field of plastic surgery. The purpose of this analysis was to characterize plastic surgery malpractice cases and examine factors influencing malpractice case outcomes, thereby identifying areas of patient safety concern. METHODS: The Candello database, which catalogs approximately 30% of all paid and unpaid malpractice claims in the United States, was used to obtain cases involving plastic surgery closed between 2009 and 2018. A total of 2674 cases were identified. A multivariable regression model was developed to analyze factors associated with a malpractice case closing with indemnity payment. RESULTS: A total of 716 claims (26.8%) resulted in an indemnity payment. The clinical severity was determined to be high in 229 cases (8.6%). Emotional trauma [ n = 558 (20.9%)] was the most frequently cited injury category. Major differences between procedure groups were not observed, with consistent severity of injury across categories. Poor surgical technique, problems with communication among providers, inadequate informed consent, and deficient documentation were significant factors predictive of malpractice cases closing with payment. Issues with technical performance resulting in a known complication and patient factors were protective against paid claims. CONCLUSIONS: The financial and clinical severity of malpractice claims in plastic surgery were relatively low overall. Multiple factors were found to be associated with a case closing with an indemnity payment. These data highlight the importance of the informed consent process and managing expectations in the clinical care of surgical patients.

Decoding the meaning of medical guidelines and their medicolegal implications.

Medical practice guidelines (MPGs) are important in medicine to ensure well tolerated and effective healthcare. They provide evidence-based recommendations for healthcare professionals in daily clinical settings. MPGs help patients and practitioners make informed decisions, ensure quality of care, allocate healthcare resources effectively and reduce legal liability. MPGs have medicolegal implications, as they influence clinical decision-making and patient outcomes, which can impact liability and malpractice cases. They define the standard of care within the healthcare industry and provide best practice recommendations. MPGs are a cornerstone of the informed consent process, as they facilitate a shared decision support system and they provide valuable evidence-based recommendations on various treatments or medical options. Finally, MPGs are also relevant in medical claims; thus, adherence to MPGs is highly encouraged in order to assure the best medical care. Nonetheless, MPGs have limitations and we advocate for wise usage of MPGs combined with the expertise of trained physicians that allows for individualisation and evidence-based recommendations. In this review, we describe the potential legal implications that MPGs may represent for healthcare providers and the role that MPGs have in daily practice at different stages in the doctor--patient relationship.