Effect of malpractice claims on orthopedic and traumatology physicians in Turkey: A survey study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the malpractice claims experienced by orthopedic and traumatology physicians and to determine their effects on burnout, job satisfaction, and clinical practice. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted on orthopedic and traumatology specialists between May 2019 and February 2020. Data collection was carried out via e-survey at "turk-ortopedi" mail group, which is an electronic communication network of orthopedic and traumatology physicians. For data collection, sociodemographic data forms were used including the general characteristics, working conditions, and the malpractice claim events along with the Maslach Burnout Inventory scale to evaluate burnout and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire to investigate job satisfaction. RESULTS: In total, 353 orthopedic and traumatology physicians (348 men, 5 women), including 37 professors, 41 associate professors, and 275 surgeons, completed the questionnaire. In total, 65.4% of the participants (231 physicians and 471 relevant dossiers) stated that they were currently facing a malpractice claim. Emotional burnout and hesitant behavior in medical practices were significantly higher among the physicians who had undergone an investigation/trial with the claim of malpractice (p<0.05), whereas intrinsic job satisfaction was significantly lower (p<0.05). It was determined that orthopedic and traumatology physicians dealing with arthroplasty, vertebral surgery, hand surgery, and foot/ankle surgeries had undergone significantly more trials (p<0.05). In the evaluation of the burnout levels and job satisfaction scores of the physicians according to the age, academic title, seniority, and institution, it was determined that burnout level decreased with age, those between the ages of 25 and 34 years were exhausted the most, and job satisfaction increased with age. It was also found that burnout level decreased and job satisfaction increased as the academic title became higher, and attending physicians were the most exhausted. Moreover, burnout level decreased as seniority increased, the most senior ones were the ones most exhausted, and job satisfaction increased with seniority. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this study has revealed that malpractice claims cause emotional burnout, low intrinsic job satisfaction, and a hesitant behavior in medical practice for the orthopedic and traumatology physicians. The concept of malpractice alone may result in unnecessary analyses/examinations for patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Diagnostic Study.

Impact of the Affordable Care Act on trauma and emergency general surgery: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Trauma and emergency general surgery (EGS) patients who are uninsured have worse outcomes as compared with insured patients. Partially modeled after the 2006 Massachusetts Healthcare Reform (MHR), the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010 with the goal of expanding health insurance coverage, primarily through state-based Medicaid expansion (ME). We evaluated the impact of ME and MHR on outcomes for trauma patients, EGS patients, and trauma systems. METHODS: This study was approved by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Guidelines Committee. Using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology, we defined three populations of interest (trauma patients, EGS patients, and trauma systems) and identified the critical outcomes (mortality, access to care, change in insurance status, reimbursement, funding). We performed a systematic review of the literature. Random effect meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were calculated for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: From 4,593 citations, we found 18 studies addressing all seven predefined outcomes of interest for trauma patients, three studies addressing six of seven outcomes for EGS patients, and three studies addressing three of eight outcomes for trauma systems. On meta-analysis, trauma patients were less likely to be uninsured after ME or MHR (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.66). These coverage expansion policies were not associated with a change in the odds of inpatient mortality for trauma (odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.05). Emergency general surgery patients also experienced a significant insurance coverage gains and no change in inpatient mortality. Insurance expansion was often associated with increased access to postacute care at discharge. The evidence for trauma systems was heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: Given the evidence quality, we conditionally recommend ME/MHR to improve insurance coverage and access to postacute care for trauma and EGS patients. We have no specific recommendation with respect to the impact of ME/MHR on trauma systems. Additional research into these questions is needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review, Economic/Decision, level III.

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.

[Clinical safety and professional liability claims in Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology]. / Seguridad clínica y reclamaciones por responsabilidad profesional en Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología.

The specialist in orthopaedic and traumatological surgery, like any other doctor, is subject to the current legal provisions while exercising their profession. Mandatory training in the medical-legal aspects of health care is essential. Claims against doctors are a reality, and orthopaedic and traumatological surgery holds first place in terms of frequency of claims according to the data from the General Council of Official Colleges of Doctors of Catalonia. Professionals must be aware of the fundamental aspects of medical professional liability, as well as specific aspects, such as defensive medicine and clinical safety. The understanding of these medical-legal aspects in the routine clinical practice can help to pave the way towards a satisfactory and safe professional career. The aim of this review is to contribute to this training, for the benefit of professionals and patients.

[Analysis of judicial sentences issued against traumatologists between 1995 and 2011 as regards medical negligence]. / Análisis de sentencias judiciales relativas a negligencias médicas emitidas contra traumatólogos entre 1995 y 2011.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Traumatology and Orthopaedic Surgery is one of the specialities with most complaints due to its scope and complexity. The aim of this study is to determine the characteristics of the complaints made against medical specialists in Traumatology, taking into account those variables that might have an influence both on the presenting of the complaint as well as on the resolving of the process. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An analysis was performed on 303 legal judgments (1995-2011) collected in the health legal judgements archive of the Madrid School of Medicine, which is linked to the Westlaw Aranzadi data base. RESULTS: Civil jurisdiction was the most used. The specific processes with most complaints were bone-joint disorders followed by vascular-nerve problems and infections. The injury claimed against most was in the lower limb, particularly the knee. The most frequent general cause of complaint was surgical treatment error, followed by diagnostic error. There was lack of information in 14.9%. There was sentencing in 49.8% of the cases, with compensation mainly being less than 50,000 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Traumatology and Orthopaedic Surgery is a speciality prone to complaints due to malpractice. The number of sentences against traumatologists is high, but compensations are usually less than 50,000 euros. The main reason for sentencing is surgical treatment error; thus being the basic surgical procedure and where precautions should be maximised. The judgements due to lack of information are high, with adequate doctor-patient communication being essential as well as the correct completion of the informed consent.

[Conservative treatment of distal radius fracture. Consequences of an uncritical follow-up]. / Konservative Behandlung einer distalen Radiusfraktur : Folgen einer unkritischen Verlaufskontrolle.

A 74-year-old woman sustained a fracture of the distal radius with an additional fracture of the styloid process of the ulna due to a fall. After reduction under local anesthesia immobilization treatment in a forearm cast was initiated. Despite increasing secondary dislocation during radiological x-ray follow-up control, the bone was described as correctly aligned by the treating physician and non-operative treatment was continued. After a total treatment period of 9 months including 7 months of physiotherapy the patient still presented a limited range of motion and local soft tissue swelling of the right wrist. The patient filed a complaint for wrong treatment of the distal radius fracture resulting in severe pain and considerable deformity of the right wrist leading to a significant handicap during activities of daily living. The expert opinion of the arbitration board ascertained a case of medical malpractice in terms of the indications. Due to the initial presence of criteria of radiological instability, an operative treatment had already been indicated at the first presentation. In addition, secondary dislocation during radiological follow-up examination should have led to conversion of treatment in favor of surgery. The arbitration board furthermore concluded that iatrogenic malpractice led to a severe deformity of the right wrist which would result in a loss of grip strength and future arthritic deformation of the wrist. Legal aspects of the case are discussed.

Professional liability in orthopaedics and traumatology in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Interest in medical errors has increased during the last few years owing to the number of medical malpractice claims. Reasons for the increasing number of claims may be related to patients' higher expectations, iatrogenic injury, and the growth of the legal services industry. Claims analysis provides helpful information in specialties in which a higher number of errors occur, highlighting areas where orthopaedic care might be improved. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined: (1) the number of claims involving orthopaedics and traumatology in Rome; (2) the risk of litigation in elective and trauma surgery; (3) the most common surgical procedures involved in claims and indemnity payments; (4) the time between the adverse medical event and the judgment date; and (5) issues related to informed consent. METHODS: We analyzed 1925 malpractice judgments decided in the Civil Court of Rome between 2004 and 2010. RESULTS: In total, 243 orthopaedics claims were filed, and in 75% of these cases surgeons were found liable; 149 (61%) of these resulted from elective surgery. Surgical teams were sued in 30 claims and found liable in 22. The total indemnity payment ordered was more than €12,350,000 (USD 16,190,000). THA and spinal surgery were the most common surgical procedures involved. Inadequate informed consent was reported in 5.3% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that careful medical examination, accurate documentation in medical records, and adequate informed consent might reduce the number of claims. We suggest monitoring of court judgments would be useful to develop prevention strategies to reduce claims.

[Identification of risk factors for subsequent legal claims in orthopedic and trauma surgery]. / Identifikation von Risikofaktoren anerkannter Vorwürfe von ärztlichen Behandlungsfehlern aus dem Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie.

In Germany, orthopedic and trauma surgery rank first in the number of alleged malpractice claims amongst all medical disciplines. Thus, the German Association of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, together with the Bavarian Chamber of Physicians, set out to identify potential predictors of approved malpractice claims to improve process quality. In a case-control study, 164 cases of approved malpractice claims were matched according to age and gender to 336 controls of rejected claims, based on the 2004 to 2006 dataset of the Bavarian Chamber of Physicians. Potential predictors of acceptance of an alleged incident were modeled by uni- and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The final model explained 71% of the probability of acceptance of an asserted claim. It contained three medical consequences (i.e. delayed healing, reoperation, and loss of motion), one specific entity (i.e. fracture) and one socio-demographic variable (i.e. professional driver) as independent predictors of acceptance. Insufficient or lacking explanation of the planned procedure to patients or relatives and / or lacking informed consent (odds ratio [OR] 2.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.23-4.43), as well as inappropriate, low-quality, or erroneously interpreted imaging (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.06-3.41) independently contributed to the likelihood of acceptance of a legal claim. Strict adherence to the principles of surgical quality assurance in terms of transparent patient information and joint informed consent procedures, as well as intransigent radiological imaging are mandatory to foster surgeon-patients-relationships and to avoid later legal claims.

Clinical and medicolegal characteristics of neck injuries.

The predominance in performing surgery of major spine injuries by neurosurgeons usually has the consequence of treating all types of spine injuries by neurosurgeons - neurotraumatologists. In the neurosurgical wards of Clinical Hospital Rijeka, we take care of the majority of these patients, following both the major, as well as minor--whiplash injuries of the neck. This article is an overview of the patients admitted in the one year period (October 1st 2009-October 1st 2010) where 1077 cases of neck injuries were analyzed. Vast majority of these injuries were due to traffic accidents (over 94%), and only a small proportion were serious injuries that needed a surgical approach--decompression and stabilization (c1%). We analyzed minor neck injuries thoroughly both because of the increasing number of whiplash neck injuries and because more complicated diagnostic and therapeutic protocols occupy too much time in the ambulatory practice of our neurotraumatologists each year thus representing a growing financial burden to the health organizations and to the society as a whole. Our results proved that the majority of the injured are male (over 60%), young and active (almost two thirds 21-40 years of age), had commonly sustained a Quebec Task Force (QTF) injury of grades 2 and 3 (almost 90%), and, if properly treated, recovered completely after a mean therapy period of ten weeks. Only a minority complained of prolonged residual symptoms, some of them connected with medico-legal issues (less than 20%). The results shown are in contrast with the general opinion that malingerers in search of financial compensation prevail in these cases, and leads to the conclusion that minor neck injuries (including whiplash) as well as Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) are real traumatological entities, that have to be seriously dealt with.