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.

Ocular Anesthesia-Related Closed Claims from Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company 2008-2018.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the types of anesthesia-related closed claims and their contributing factors, using data from the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company (OMIC). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of preexisting data. PARTICIPANTS: Plaintiffs who filed a professional liability claim or suit (written demand for money) against OMIC-insured ophthalmologists, ophthalmic practices, or surgicenters in which the surgical case occurred. METHODS: Plaintiff claims were collected from the OMIC database from 2008 to 2018 using search queries for terms associated with known complications of ophthalmic anesthesia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number and types of anesthesia-related injuries and claims, who administered the anesthesia, the outcomes of the claim or suit, cost to defend, and payments made to plaintiffs. RESULTS: Sixty-three anesthesia-related claims or suits were filed by 50 plaintiffs. Anesthesia-related injuries included globe perforation (n = 17), death (n = 13), retrobulbar hemorrhage (n = 7), optic nerve damage (n = 4), vascular occlusions (n = 2), pain (n = 2), eye or head movement resulting in injury (n = 2), and 1 case each for numbness, diplopia, and tooth loss during intubation. All but 1 patient who died had preexisting, significant comorbidities. Two deaths were related to brainstem anesthesia. Regarding the type of anesthesia in the closed claims, retrobulbar and peribulbar anesthesia were the most common types (n = 16 each), followed by local infiltration around the lids and facial nerve (n = 6), topical anesthesia (n = 5), and general anesthesia (n = 5). In 2 cases, the exact type of anesthesia was unknown but not general. The 5 topical with sedation anesthesia-related claims were due to inadequate pain control (n = 2), ocular movement resulting in capsular rupture (n = 2), or death (n = 1) allegedly related to excessive or inadequate monitoring of sedation. There were 5 claims related to general anesthesia including 4 deaths and 1 tooth loss during intubation. Sedation was alleged to be a factor in 5 cases resulting in death. Anticoagulants were a factor in 3 retrobulbar hemorrhage cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although claims and suits were infrequent given the large number of insured ophthalmologists and the large number of surgical cases requiring various types of anesthesia performed over the 10.5-year study period, severe injuries can occur.

An Examination of Medical Malpractice Claims Involving Physician Trainees.

PURPOSE: To identify patient-, provider-, and claim-related factors of medical malpractice claims in which physician trainees were directly involved in the harm events. METHOD: The authors performed a case-control study using medical malpractice claims closed between 2012-2016 and contributed to the Comparative Benchmarking System database by teaching hospitals. Using the service extender flag, they classified claims as cases if physician trainees were directly involved in the harm events. They classified claims as controls if they were from the same facilities, but trainees were not directly involved in the harm events. They performed multivariable regression with predictor variables being patient and provider characteristics. The outcome was physician trainee involvement in harm events. RESULTS: From the original pool of 30,973 claims, there were 581 cases and 2,610 controls. The majority of cases involved residents (471, 81%). Cases had a statistically significant higher rate of having a trainee named as defendants than controls (184, 32% vs 233, 9%; P < .001). The most common final diagnosis for cases was puncture or laceration during surgery (62, 11%). Inadequate supervision was a contributing factor in 140 (24%) cases overall, with the majority (104, 74%) of these claims being procedure related. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that trainees were most likely to be involved in harm events in specialties such as oral surgery/dentistry and obstetrics-gynecology (OR = 7.99, 95% CI 2.93, 21.83 and OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.24, 2.66, respectively), when performing procedures (OR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.27, 1.96), or when delivering care in the emergency room (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.43, 1.91). CONCLUSIONS: Among claims involving physician trainees, procedures were common and often associated with inadequate supervision. Training directors of surgical specialties can use this information to improve resident supervision policies. The goal is to reduce the likelihood of future harm events.

Tibial Shaft Fractures in Workers Compensation and No-Fault Insurance Is There a Difference in Resource Utilization?

BACKGROUND: Workers Compensation claims have been previously associated with inferior clinical outcomes. However, variation in inpatient stays for orthopedic trauma injuries according to insurance type has not been previously examined. METHODS: We investigated the differences according to insurance for tibial shaft fractures in regard to length of stay and disposition. Using the New York SPARCS database, we identified 1,856 adult non-elderly patients with an isolated tibial shaft fracture who underwent surgery. Patients were stratified by insurance type, including private, Medicaid, Workers Compensation, and no-fault, which covers medical expenses related to automobile or pedestrian accidents. RESULTS: Compared to private insurance (mean: 2.7 days), length of stay was longer for no-fault (mean: 3.9 days; adjusted difference +33%, p < 0.001) and Medicaid (mean: 3.5 days; adjusted difference +22%, p < 0.001), but not significantly different for Workers Compensation (mean: 3.5 days; adjusted difference +4%, p = 0.474). Compared to private insurance (rate: 3.5%), disposition to a facility was significantly higher for no-fault (rate: 10.1%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.3, p < 0.001) and Medicaid (rate: 7.6%; OR = 2.2, p = 0.003), but was not significantly different for Workers Compensation (rate: 6.3%; OR = 1.8, p = 0.129). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with no-fault insurance, but not Workers Compensation, are subject to longer hospital stays and are more likely to be discharged to a facility following operative fixation of an isolated tibial shaft fracture. These findings suggest that financial, social, and legal factors influence medical care for patients involved in automobile accidents with no-fault insurance.

Health care industry insights: A focus on the hospital and physician professional liability claims environment.

This article summarizes various findings published in the Aon/ASHRM Hospital and Physician Professional Liability Benchmark Analysis, October 2018.1 The report analyzes medical professional liability (PL) claims and exposure information from hospital systems and physician groups across the United States that self-insure their PL exposures. The purpose of this benchmark analysis is to provide health care risk managers and financial leaders with a data-supported tool to identify, measure, and better understand the risks that affect their organization.

A contemporary medicolegal claims analysis of injuries related to neuraxial anesthesia between 2007 and 2016.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To provide a contemporary medicolegal analysis of claims brought against anesthesia providers in the United States related to neuraxial blocks for surgery and obstetrics. DESIGN: In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed closed claims data from the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database between 2007 and 2016. SETTING: Closed claims from inpatient and outpatient settings related to neuraxial anesthesia for surgical procedures and obstetrics. PATIENTS: Forty-five claims were identified for analysis. These patients underwent a variety of surgical procedures, included both children and adults, and with ages ranging from 6 to 82. INTERVENTIONS: Patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia (spinals, epidurals) for surgery or obstetrics. MEASUREMENTS: Data collected includes patient demographics, alleged injury type/severity, surgical specialty, likely contributors to the alleged damaging event, and case outcome. Some of the data were drawn directly from coded variables in the CRICO database, and some were gathered from narrative case summaries. MAIN RESULTS: Settlement payments were made in 20% of claims. Reported adverse outcomes ranged from temporary minor to permanent major injuries. Most closed claims were classified as permanent minor injuries. The greatest number of claims involved residual weakness and radiculopathy resulting from epidurals. The largest contributing factor to these injuries was noted to be "Technical Knowledge/Performance" of the anesthesia provider followed by "Missing or Documentation Error." Over half of the claims arose from obstetric patients (31%) and patients undergoing orthopedic surgery (27%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pre-existing radiculopathy or comorbidities may warrant more thorough informed consent about the increased risk of injury. Additionally, prompt follow-up, monitoring, and documentation of post-operative symptoms, such as weakness or radiculopathy, are crucial for improving patient safety and satisfaction. More timely communication with the patient and the surgical team regarding residual neurologic symptoms is important for earlier diagnosis of injury.

Patient Reported Injuries After Ventral Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:: The Swedish National Patient Insurance Company (LÖF) can compensate patients who believe they have been exposed to an avoidable injury or malpractice in healthcare. Its register covers 95% of Swedish healthcare providers. MATERIAL AND METHODS:: Data on patients operated for primary or incisional ventral hernia in Sweden between 2010 and 2015 and who had filed a claim, were retrieved from LÖF. A total of 290 cases were identified and included. Files include a copy of records, relevant imaging, and an expert advisor's opinion. RESULTS:: Inadvertent enterotomy occurred during 25 repairs and in these cases, laparoscopic repair was clearly overrepresented ( p < 0.001). Complications related to the surgical site (infection and ugly scar) were predominantly related to open repairs ( p < 0.001). Twenty percentage (57/290) of the claims were directly related to an anesthetic mishap. Univariate ordinal regression showed that the odds of receiving a high reimbursement was significantly increased if laparoscopic repair was performed p < 0.001 (odds ratio: 0.37; 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.65). Sixty-three percentage of claims were filed by women. CONCLUSION:: Inadvertent enterotomy is overrepresented, and the probability that a claim filed for an avoidable injury leads to high reimbursement is greater if laparoscopic repair is performed rather than open ventral hernia repair. The high amount of injuries related to general anesthesia during umbilical hernia repair may be reduced with an increased proportion executed in local anesthesia.

A 15 years survey for dental malpractice claims in Rome, Italy.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, dental malpractice claims seems to have increased dramatically worldwide without a clear explanation. The aim of our work is to shed more light on this phenomenon to better understand its magnitude and trend, and to point out possible critical factors that, if changed, can mitigate it. MATERIAL AND METHOD: 458 cases of dental malpractice sentenced by the civil court of Rome, Italy, from 2001 to 2015, were collected. Useful information was extracted, reported in a grid and statistically analyzed. Data was compared between years and overall evaluated. RESULTS: Multiple information were obtained, among which: the number of dental malpractice claims has decreased in most recent years; Dental professionals are found guilty in 74% of cases; the average compensation granted is 18.820,15 €; only 47,7% of the insured dentist found guilty was fully covered by their insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to what we expected, dental malpractice claims in court have decreased in recent years. The limit liability of dental professional insurances is high compared to the average compensation granted and the insurance doesn't always cover all the expenses for the presence of peculiar clauses in the contract.

Variables That Impact Medical Malpractice Claims Involving Plastic Surgeons in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Medical malpractice lawsuits contribute directly and indirectly to the cost of healthcare in the United States. Reducing medical malpractice claims represents an often unrecognized opportunity for improving both the quality and affordability of healthcare. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to better understand variables of the informed consent process that may contribute to reducing malpractice claims in plastic surgery. METHODS: A prospective multiple choice questionnaire was distributed via email to all of the 1694 members of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS) to evaluate attitudes and practices of informed consent in relation to medical malpractice. RESULTS: A total of 129 questionnaires obtained from plastic surgeons were eligible for analysis (response rate 7.6%). Respondents who provided procedure-specific brochures to their patients were significantly less likely to be sued for medical malpractice (P = 0.004) than those who did not. Plastic surgeons that participated in malpractice carrier-required courses on avoiding medical malpractice litigation had a similarly significantly reduced likelihood of lawsuits. (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Variables that may reduce malpractice claims, and thereby both improve the quality and affordability of healthcare, include: (1) the use of procedure-specific patient education brochures; and (2) physician participation in malpractice insurance carrier-required courses. These findings should be of interest to physicians, hospitals, and insurance companies.

Nature of Medical Malpractice Claims Against Radiation Oncologists.

PURPOSE: To examine characteristics of medical malpractice claims involving radiation oncologists closed during a 10-year period. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Malpractice claims filed against radiation oncologists from 2003 to 2012 collected by a nationwide liability insurance trade association were analyzed. Outcomes included the nature of claims and indemnity payments, including associated presenting diagnoses, procedures, alleged medical errors, and injury severity. We compared the likelihood of a claim resulting in payment in relation to injury severity categories (death as referent) using binomial logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 362 closed claims involving radiation oncology, 102 (28%) of which were paid, resulting in $38 million in indemnity payments. The most common alleged errors included "improper performance" (38% of closed claims, 18% were paid; 29% [$11 million] of total indemnity), "errors in diagnosis" (25% of closed claims, 46% were paid; 44% [$17 million] of total indemnity), and "no medical misadventure" (14% of closed claims, 8% were paid; less than 1% [$148,000] of total indemnity). Another physician was named in 32% of claims, and consent issues/breach of contract were cited in 18%. Claims for injury resulting in death represented 39% of closed claims and 25% of total indemnity. "Improper performance" was the primary alleged error associated with injury resulting in death. Compared with claims involving death, major temporary injury (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-5.85, P=.009), significant permanent injury (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.48-6.46, P=.003), and major permanent injury (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.89-16.15, P=.002) had a higher likelihood of a claim resulting in indemnity payment. CONCLUSIONS: Improper performance was the most common alleged malpractice error. Claims involving significant or major injury were more likely to be paid than those involving death. Insights into the nature of liability claims against radiation oncologists may help direct efforts to improve quality of care and minimize the risk of being sued.

The Plastic Surgeon as Employee: A Pilot Survey of the California Society of Plastic Surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Plastic surgeons endure years of training yet remain poorly equipped to negotiate first employment contracts. Our aims were to evaluate typical plastic surgeon employment contracts and assess contract comprehensiveness. We sought elements that should be included to better preserve varied interests. METHODS: A brief, anonymous, e-mailed survey was sent to California Society of Plastic Surgeons members and responses collected over 2 months. We collected information such as years in practice, geographic area, types of practices and number of surgeons within them, and legal standing of partnerships. We asked whether respondents sought legal assistance and specific elements were elaborated. We asked how content they were with their contracts while allowing commentary. RESULTS: Our survey generated 113 responses. 50.0% of respondents reported being in practice for at least 20 years; 2.68% had been in practice for up to 5 years. 62.5% reported being in private practice and 27.7% reported being in academia. In-state geographic distribution of respondents accounted for 85.6%, whereas 14.4% reported practicing out-of-state.Practice size was diverse, with 41.4% of respondents having worked in a group practice of 3 or more, 27.9% in partnership, and 23.4% in solo practice. For partnerships, 29.9% had made formal legal arrangements, whereas 20.6% had made informal arrangements. 74.5% of respondents did not seek legal assistance.Malpractice coverage varied from 51.6% with claims-made, to 21.7% with tail, to 33.0% with no coverage at all. 63.9% reported having no group disability policy. 26.4% reported annual income of less than US $100,000; 49.1% reported US $101,000 to US $200,000; 17.9% reported US $201,000 to US $300,000; 6.60% reported greater than US $300,000. Using a 5-point scale, 7.69% of respondents reported being "extremely dissatisfied" with their first employment contracts (score of 1), whereas 24.0% were "perfectly happy" (5).Eighty-two respondents offered advice. Common themes included seeking legal counsel; considering eventual solo practice; planning long-term; seeking mentorship; and cautioning against third party interests. CONCLUSIONS: New plastic surgeons will find themselves employed by institutions. Seeking attorneys familiar with the profession is advisable. Lack of awareness regarding malpractice options and disability coverage are 2 areas of concern. We reveal critical contract elements that surgeons should negotiate to ensure smooth transition to practice.

Injury and Liability Associated with Implantable Devices for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Due to an increase in implantable device-related anesthesia pain medicine claims, the authors investigated anesthesia liability associated with these devices. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, the authors identified 148 pain medicine device claims from 1990 or later in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project Database. Device-related damaging events included medication administration events, infections, hematomas, retained catheter fragments, cerebrospinal fluid leaks, cord or cauda equina trauma, device placed at wrong level, stimulator incorrectly programmed, delay in recognition of granuloma formation, and other issues. RESULTS: The most common devices were implantable drug delivery systems (IDDS; 64%) and spinal cord stimulators (29%). Device-related care consisted of surgical device procedures (n = 107) and IDDS maintenance (n = 41). Severity of injury was greater in IDDS maintenance claims (56% death or severe permanent injury) than in surgical device procedures (26%, P < 0.001). Death and brain damage in IDDS maintenance claims resulted from medication administration errors (n = 13; 32%); spinal cord injury resulted from delayed recognition of granuloma formation (n = 9; 22%). The most common damaging events for surgical device procedures were infections, inadequate pain relief, cord trauma, retained catheter fragments, and subcutaneous hygroma. Care was more commonly assessed as less than appropriate (78%) and payments more common (63%) in IDDS maintenance than in surgical device procedure claims (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Half of IDDS maintenance claims were associated with death or permanent severe injury, most commonly from medication errors or failure to recognize progressive neurologic deterioration. Practitioners implanting or managing devices for chronic pain should exercise caution in these areas to minimize patient harm.

Physician spending and subsequent risk of malpractice claims: observational study.

STUDY QUESTION: Is a higher use of resources by physicians associated with a reduced risk of malpractice claims? METHODS: Using data on nearly all admissions to acute care hospitals in Florida during 2000-09 linked to malpractice history of the attending physician, this study investigated whether physicians in seven specialties with higher average hospital charges in a year were less likely to face an allegation of malpractice in the following year, adjusting for patient characteristics, comorbidities, and diagnosis. To provide clinical context, the study focused on obstetrics, where the choice of caesarean deliveries are suggested to be influenced by defensive medicine, and whether obstetricians with higher adjusted caesarean rates in a year had fewer alleged malpractice incidents the following year. STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: The data included 24,637 physicians, 154,725 physician years, and 18,352,391 hospital admissions; 4342 malpractice claims were made against physicians (2.8% per physician year). Across specialties, greater average spending by physicians was associated with reduced risk of incurring a malpractice claim. For example, among internists, the probability of experiencing an alleged malpractice incident in the following year ranged from 1.5% (95% confidence interval 1.2% to 1.7%) in the bottom spending fifth ($19,725 (£12,800; €17,400) per hospital admission) to 0.3% (0.2% to 0.5%) in the top fifth ($39,379 per hospital admission). In six of the specialties, a greater use of resources was associated with statistically significantly lower subsequent rates of alleged malpractice incidents. A principal limitation of this study is that information on illness severity was lacking. It is also uncertain whether higher spending is defensively motivated. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: Within specialty and after adjustment for patient characteristics, higher resource use by physicians is associated with fewer malpractice claims. FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: This study was supported by the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health (grant 1DP5OD017897-01 to ABJ) and National Institute of Aging (R37 AG036791 to JB). The authors have no competing interests or additional data to share.