Compensation claims following anterior cruciate ligament injuries reported to the patient insurance company in Sweden in 2005-2014.

Background and purpose - Patients in the Swedish healthcare system are insured against avoidable adverse events via Landstingens Ömsesidiga Försäkringsbolag (LÖF). We assessed the reasons for compensation claims reported to LÖF following an ACL injury. Patients and methods - We searched the LÖF database for compensation claims related to ACL injuries reported in 2005-2014, and cross-matched claims with the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register. We then performed a review of the medical records. Results - We identified 530 eligible claims in 2005-2014. 352 (66%) claims were accepted by LÖF and 178 claims were rejected. Accepted claims corresponded to fewer than 1% of ACL surgeries performed in the same period. The most common reasons for an accepted claim were postoperative septic arthritis followed by suboptimal surgery and delay in diagnosis and treatment. Interpretation - There are different reasons for accepting a compensation claim following an ACL injury, which represents different treatment errors that can be avoided.

Acute reconstruction results in less sick-leave days and as such fewer indirect costs to the individual and society compared to delayed reconstruction for ACL injuries.

PURPOSE: To compare the total number of sick-leave days caused by the knee injury from the day of injury and over the first year between acute (within 8 days) and delayed (6-10 weeks) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and also assess other clinical outcomes during this period. METHODS: Seventy patients with an acute ACL injury and Tegner level of 6 or more were randomized to acute (within 8 days) or delayed (after 6-10 weeks) ACLR. Patient-reported outcomes; objective IKDC and manual stability measurements were assessed at 6 and 12 months. With data from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency (Försäkringskassan) information about the number of sick-leave days due to the knee injury over the following 12 months was collected and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Seventy-one percent received compensation for sick leave (26 in the acute versus 23 in the delayed group). The mean number of sick-leave days for the acute group was significantly lower (M = 56.9, SD = 36.4) compared to the delayed group (M = 88.5, SD = 50.2), p < 0.05. The acute group was also significantly stronger in flexion in both slow and fast angle velocities according to Biodex®. No other differences were found between the groups in other clinical assessments or in terms of associated injuries. CONCLUSION: Acute and delayed ACLR provided comparable clinical outcomes after 12 months. Acute reconstruction resulted in less sick-leave days and as such fewer indirect costs to the individual and society. These findings suggest that if patients requiring ACLR can be identified early and ACLR can be performed in the acute phase, socioeconomic costs can potentially be reduced by minimizing time off work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.