Ophthalmic Trauma Malpractice in the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company Database.

PURPOSE: To review ophthalmic trauma malpractice claims in the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company (OMIC) database to determine the frequency and causes of litigation. METHODS: A retrospective case series analysis of ophthalmic trauma claims from 2009 to 2019 was completed. Cases were selected only if the injury was secondary to trauma (e.g., fall, gunshot wound, paintball injury, etc.); iatrogenic traumatic surgical injuries were excluded. RESULTS: 31 closed cases associated with 40 total claims related to ophthalmic trauma out of 2565 claims (1.56%) in the OMIC database were analysed. 13 of the 31 cases (41.9%) were decided for the plaintiff. In decisions for the plaintiff, the median settlement amount was $330,000 (range $125,000-$1,000,000). The most frequent initial diagnoses were corneal abrasion (n = 10), hyphema (n = 5) and open-globe injury (n = 5), and the most common final diagnoses were endophthalmitis (n = 8), intraocular foreign body (n = 7) and retinal detachment (n = 7). The most common causes of malpractice litigation were a delay in referral or follow-up (n = 11) and failure to get appropriate imaging (n = 8). In the 13 cases decided for the plaintiff, experts concluded nine did not meet standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmic trauma malpractice claims are very uncommon in the United States, however, the payout is higher than non-trauma settlements, and approximately 40% of cases were decided for the plaintiff. Care could be improved with a careful history and complete ophthalmic examination (with dilated fundoscopy), imaging in appropriate patients, meticulous documentation, and early sub-specialist referral when the diagnosis or management plan was unclear.

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.

Operating room fires in periocular surgery.

AIM: A survey of ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgeons as well as seven-year data regarding claims made to the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company (OMIC) is used to discuss operating room fires in periocular surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of all closed claim operating room fires submitted to OMIC was performed. A survey soliciting personal experiences with operating room fires was distributed to all American Society of Oculoplastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. RESULTS: Over the last 2 decades, OMIC managed 7 lawsuits resulting from an operating room fire during periocular surgery. The mean settlement per lawsuit was $145,285 (range $10,000-474,994). All six patients suffered burns to the face, and three required admission to a burn unit. One hundred and sixty-eight surgeons participated in the online survey. Approximately 44% of survey respondents have experienced at least one operating room fire. Supplemental oxygen was administered in 88% of these cases. Most surgical fires reported occurred in a hospital-based operating room (59%) under monitored anesthesia care (79%). Monopolar cautery (41%) and thermal, high-temperature cautery (41%) were most commonly reported as the inciting agents. Almost half of the patients involved in a surgical fire experienced a complication from the fire (48%). Sixty-nine percent of hospital operating rooms and 66% of ambulatory surgery centers maintain an operating room fire prevention policy. CONCLUSIONS: An intraoperative fire can be costly for both the patient and the surgeon. Ophthalmic surgeons operate in an oxygen rich and therefore flammable environment. Proactive measures can be undertaken to reduce the incidence of surgical fires periocular surgery; however, a fire can occur at any time and the entire operating room team must be constantly vigilant to prevent and manage operating room fires.

Twenty-five years of professional liability in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus: the OMIC experience.

PURPOSE: To summarize the claims statistics of the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company (OMIC) in the field of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus (POS). METHODS: Internal OMIC case summaries and defense counsel case evaluations of all claims in the field of POS closed between December 1, 1988, and February 19, 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 140 claims were closed over the 25-year study period, of which 44 were closed with an indemnity payment. Claims related to strabismus and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) were most common, and claims related to ROP resulted in the highest indemnity and expense payments. Issues related to follow-up represented the most significant risk factor among system-related claims. CONCLUSIONS: Claims in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus were infrequent but associated with three times higher average indemnity payments relative to all claims paid by OMIC during the course of the study.

Disruptive or dangerous patients (sample policy and procedure).

UNLABELLED: This sample policy and procedure assumes there is a practice compliance officer and compliance committee. However, in some offices the manager or the physician will be the de facto "compliance officer". Therefore, it is assumed that duties and responsibilities in the sample policy will be assigned to meet the needs of the practice. DISCLAIMER: This information is intended solely to provide risk management recommendations. It is not intended to constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a source for legal advice. If legal advice is desired or needed, an attorney should be consulted.

Retinopathy of prematurity malpractice claims: the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company experience.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the causes of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) malpractice claims filed with the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company. METHODS: All closed ROP malpractice claims were reviewed. RESULTS: Eight cases involved failure of transfer of care on patient discharge from the hospital, 3 cases demonstrated inappropriately long periods between follow-up examinations, 1 case was due to failure of outpatient referral from screening to the treating ophthalmologist, and 1 case concerned unsupervised resident provision of ROP care. CONCLUSIONS: Many preventable factors can be addressed to improve ROP care. It is essential to ensure that ophthalmologists, neonatologists, pediatricians, and families are updated on current guidelines for ROP screening and treatment and to facilitate follow-up appointments before patient discharge from the hospital. Doing so can help avoid future malpractice claims and patient harm.