Spine Surgery Infection, Litigation, and Financial Compensation: Analysis of 98 Claims Involving French Spine Surgeons Between 2015 and 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Since 2002, France has adopted the Patients' Rights Law, an alternative malpractice scheme creating a faster, less expensive out-of-court settlement ensuring compensation even in the absence of fault. We aimed to describe the implications of this system by analyzing 5 years of claims for infections related to spinal surgeries collected by the main insurer of French spine surgeons. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 98 anonymized malpractice claims from 2015 to 2019 (20% of overall claims), including anonymized medical records of the patients, reports of the independent experts, final judgments, and entities supporting the compensation if any. RESULTS: Claims included 8 deaths and 17 newly acquired neurological sequelae. The conclusions identified 22 faulty cases. The most frequent fault was a delay in diagnosis (10 cases), followed by inadequate surgical management (6 cases), inadequate antibiotic therapy (5 cases), and inadequate follow-up (1 case). Among the 67 cases (68.4%) proved not to be at fault, 10 were covered by the national solidarity fund because of their severity, and the remaining 57 were covered by hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Since the 2002 Patients' Rights Law, patients with postoperative infections have always received compensation. The out-of-court settlement offers the patients incurring morbidities the assurance of faster compensation. Although certainly subject to selection criteria, this procedure is free and does not necessitate the presence of a lawyer. The analysis of expert reports and the resulting court decisions imply prevention, anticipation, and collaboration of all health care providers and open an opportunity to improve their practices to limit these crucial followings.

Litigations following spinal neurosurgery in France: "out-of-court system," therapeutic hazard, and welfare state.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal surgeries carry risks of malpractice litigation due to the random nature of their functional results, which may not meet patient expectations, and the hazards associated with these complex procedures. Claims are frequent and costly. In France, since 2002, a new law, the Patients' Rights Law of March 4, 2002, has created an alternative, out-of-court scheme, which established a simplified, rapid, free-of-charge procedure (Commission for Conciliation and Compensation [CCI]). Moreover, this law has optimized the compensation provided to patients for therapeutic hazards by use of a national solidarity fund. The authors analyzed the consequences of this alternative route in the case of claims against private neurosurgeons in France. METHODS: From the data bank of the insurer Mutuelle d'Assurances du Corps de Santé Français (MACSF), the main insurance company for private neurosurgeons in France, the authors retrospectively analyzed 193 files covering the period 2015-2019. These computerized files comprised the anonymized medical records of the patients, the reports of the independent experts, and the final judgments of the CCI and the entities supporting the compensation, if any. RESULTS: During the 5-year study period (2015-2019), the insurance company recorded 494 complaints involving private neurosurgeons for spinal surgery procedures, of which 126 (25.5%) were in civil court, 123 (24.9%) were under amicable procedure, and 245 (49.6%) were in the out-of-court scheme administered by the CCI. Out of these 245 cases, only 193 were closed due to delays. The conclusions of the commission were rejection/incompetence decisions in 47.2% of the cases, therapeutic hazards in 21.2%, nosocomial infections in 17.6%, and practitioner fault in 13.5%. National solidarity compensated for 48 complaints (24.8%). The final decision of the CCI is not always consistent with the conclusions of the experts mandated by it, illustrating the difficulty in defining the concept of hazards. The authors found that the therapeutic hazards retained and compensated by the national solidarity included decompensated spondylotic myelopathies (15% of the 40 cases) and cauda equina syndromes (30%). As allowed by law, 11.5% of the patients who were not satisfied triggered a classical procedure in a court. CONCLUSIONS: In the French out-of-court system, trial decisions resulting in rulings of proven medical malpractice are rare, but patients can start a new procedure in the classical courts. The therapeutic hazard remains a subtle definition, which may be problematic and require further discussion between experts and magistrates. In spite of the imperfections, this out-of-court system proposes a major evolution to move patients and medical providers from legal battles to reconciliations.

Assessment of the Radiation Exposure of Surgeons and Patients During a Lumbar Microdiskectomy and a Cervical Microdiskectomy: A French Prospective Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical and lumbar disk herniations are the most frequently carried out procedures in spinal surgery. Often, a few snapshots during the procedure are necessary to validate the level or to position the implant. The objective of this study is to quantitatively estimate the radiation received by a spine surgeon and patient during a low-dose radiation procedure. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter study in France from November 2014 to April 2015. Four spine centers were monitored for radiation received by surgeons during interventions for lumbar disk herniation and cervical disk herniation. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were included. For lumbar disk herniation, the average exposure for the surgeon was 0.584 µSv on the chest, 5.291 µSv on the lens, and 9.295 µSv on the hands per procedure. For these procedures, the dose area product (DAP) was 94.2 ± 198.4 cGy·cm(2), and the fluoroscopic time was 10.2 ± 16.9 seconds. For a herniated cervical disk, the average exposure for the surgeon was 0.122 µSv on the chest, 3.106 µSv on the lens, and 7.143 µSv on the hands per procedure. For these procedures, the DAP was 35.7 ± 72.1 cGy·cm(2), and the fluoroscopic time was 19.7 ± 13.7 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to x-rays for surgeons and patients during surgery for lumbar disk herniation is higher than during surgery for cervical herniation disk. Our results show that radiation exposure to the spine surgeon is still far below the annual dose limits.