Medical Malpractice in Neurosurgery: A Comprehensive Analysis

Neurosurgical Malpractice Litigation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Neurosurgery has 1 of the highest risks for medical malpractice claims. We reviewed the factors associated with neurosurgical malpractice claims and litigation in the United States and reported the outcomes through a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines using the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. We sought to identify pertinent studies containing information about medical malpractice claims and outcomes involving neurosurgeons in the United States.

RESULTS

We identified 15 retrospective studies spanning from 2002 to 2023 that reviewed over 7890 malpractice claims involving practicing neurosurgeons in the United States. Disparities were evident in neurosurgical litigation, with 474 cases linked to brain-related surgeries and a larger proportion, 1926 cases, tied to spine surgeries. The most commonly filed claims were intraprocedural errors (37.4%), delayed diagnoses (32.1%), and failure to treat (28.8%). Less frequently filed claims included misdiagnosis or choice of incorrect procedure (18.4%), occurrence of death (17.3%), test misinterpretation (14.4%), failure to appropriately refer patients for evaluation/treatment (14.3%), unnecessary surgical procedures (13.3%), and lack of informed consent (8.3%). The defendant was favored in 44.3% of claims, while in 31.3% of lawsuits were dropped, 17.7% of verdicts favored the plaintiff, and 16.6% reached an out of court settlement. Only 3.5% of lawsuits found both parties liable.

CONCLUSION

Neurosurgery is a high-risk specialty with 1 of the highest rates of malpractice claims. Spine claims had a significantly higher rate of filed malpractice claims, while cranial malpractice claims were associated with higher litigation compensation. Predictably, spinal cord injuries play a crucial role in predicting litigation. Importantly, nonsurgical treatments are also a common source of liability in neurosurgical practice.

Medical malpractice and epidural hematomas: a retrospective analysis of 101 cases in the United States

Background

Neurosurgeons face particularly high rates of litigation compared to physicians in other fields. Malpractice claims are commonly seen after mismanagement of life-threatening medical emergencies, such as epidural haematomas. Due to the lack of legal analysis pertaining to this condition, the aim of this study is to identify risk factors associated with litigation in cases relating to the diagnosis and treatment of epidural haematomas.

Materials and methods

Westlaw Edge, an online database, was used to analyze malpractice cases related to epidural haematomas between 1986 and 2022. Information regarding plaintiff demographics, defendant specialty, reason for litigation, trial outcomes, and payouts for verdicts and settlements were recorded. Comparative analysis between cases that returned a jury verdict in favour of the plaintiff versus defendant was completed.

Results

A total of 101 cases were included in the analysis. Failure to diagnose was the most common reason for litigation (n = 64, 63.4%), followed by negligent care resulting in an epidural haematoma (n = 44, 43.6%). Spine surgery (n = 29, 28.7%), trauma (n = 28, 27.7%), and epidural injection/catheter/electrode placement (n = 21, 20.8%) were the primary causes of haematomas. Neurosurgeons (n = 18, 17.8%) and anesthesiologists (n = 17, 16.8%) were the two most common physician specialties cited as defendants. Most cases resulted in a jury verdict in favour of the defense (n = 54, 53.5%). For cases ending in plaintiff verdicts, the average payout was $3 621 590.45, while the average payment for settlements was $2 432 272.73.

Conclusion

Failure to diagnose epidural haematomas is the most common reason for malpractice litigation, with neurosurgeons and anesthesiologists being the most common physician specialties to be named as defendants. More than half of all cases returned a jury verdict in favour of the defense and, on average, settlements proved to be more cost-effective than plaintiff verdicts.

Epidemiology of the causes of complaints after discectomy collected from a French insurance company

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar discectomy is a frequent procedure performed by surgeons from specialties at risk of patient complaints. The objective of the study was to analyze the causes of litigations following lumbar discectomy to be able to reduce their frequency.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This observational, retrospective study was carried out at a French insurance company (Branchet). All files opened between the 1st of January 2003 and the 31st of December 2020, following lumbar discectomy without instrumentation and without any other associated code, undertaken by a surgeon insured by Branchet, were analyzed. The data was extracted from the database by a consultant from the insurance company and analyzed by an orthopedic surgeon.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four records met all inclusion criteria and were complete and available for analysis. Infection was the leading cause of litigation, responsible for 27% of complaints. Residual postoperative pain was the second cause of complaint with 26% of cases, of which 93% had persistent pain. Neurological deficits were the third cause of complaint with 25% of cases among which 76% were related to the appearance of a deficit and 20% related to the persistence of an existing deficit. Early recurrence of herniated disc also appeared as a cause of complaint, accounting for 7% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Surgical site infection, persistence of pain, and the appearance or persistence of neurological disorders are the primary causes of complaints leading to investigation in the aftermath of lumbar discectomy. It seems essential to us that this information be brought to the attention of surgeons to enable them to better adapt their explanations in the delivery of preoperative information.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A 9-year analysis of medical malpractice litigations in coronary artery bypass grafting in China

BACKGROUND

The coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is one of the high-risk litigated medical specialties. Further elucidating the causes behind these malpractice claims can help physicians avoid patient injury. This study analyzed CABG litigations occurred in different level hospitals to outline the basic characteristics, as well as present a analysis on the medical malpractice that result in lawsuits.

METHODS

This study utilized the "China Judgments Online" database to compile litigations from 2012 to 2021 across China. 109 cases related to the CABG were included in the study, and were analyzed for demographic, patient outcomes and verdict characteristics in different levels of hospitals.

RESULTS

The median age of plaintiff patient was 62 years, the median length of stay was 25 days, and the median responsibility ratio of the litigation cases was 30%. The average proportion of responsibility of national, provincial and municipal hospitals were 29.6%, 28.4% and 39.5% respectively, and the median days after surgery to death of that were 15, 9 and 5 separately. The top 5 postoperative complications in dispute cases were: low cardiac output syndrome, postoperative hemorrhage, non-surgical site infections, surgical site infections and arrhythmia.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis and treatment capabilities of coronary artery bypass grafting in different levels of hospitals in China were inconsistent, and the treatment capabilities in prefecture-level hospitals were lower than that in national hospitals. The procedural error, failure to properly monitor the patient and diagnostic errors were common in CABG litigations. Postoperative complications related to surgical injuries and insufficient basic postoperative management lead to a higher responsibility proportion.

Litigation in pediatric otorhinolaryngology: Lessons in improving patient care

OBJECTIVE(S)

Medico-legal claims involving children place a substantial financial burden on health services and have a profound emotional and psychological impact on clinicians. Our objective was to analyze both the common causes and cost of litigation in pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all clinical negligence claims within pediatric otolaryngology (0-17 years inclusive) in NHS (National Health Service) England held by the clinical negligence service 'NHS Resolution between' 4/2013 and 4/2020.

RESULTS

There were 100 claims in pediatric otorhinolaryngology accounting for an estimated potential total cost of just under £49 million with an average of 14 claims per year. Over half (52%) of claims were related to an operation with cause codes "Operator Error/Intra-Op Problem", "Diathermy Injury" and "Failure to Warn - Consent" most cited. The most common operation cited in a claim was tonsillectomy with an average cost per claim of £47,084. There were 21 claims coded as either "failure to diagnose" or "failure to treat" in relation to cholesteatoma, with an average cost per claim of £61,086.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest study to date analyzing the reasons and potential cost of clinical negligence claims within pediatric otolaryngology. Many learning opportunities exist to reduce patient morbidity, mortality and improve the patient experience through litigation data analysis.

Clinical Anatomy and Medical Malpractice-A Narrative Review with Methodological Implications

Anatomical issues are intrinsically included in medico-legal methodology, however, higher awareness would be needed about the relevance of anatomy in addressing medico-legal questions in clinical/surgical contexts. Forensic Clinical Anatomy has been defined as "the practical application of Clinical Anatomy to the ascertainment and evaluation of medico-legal problems". The so-called individual anatomy (normal anatomy, anatomical variations, or anatomical modifications due to development, aging, para-physiological conditions, diseases, or surgery) may acquire specific relevance in medico-legal ascertainment and evaluation of cases of supposed medical malpractice. Here, we reviewed the literature on the relationships between anatomy, clinics/surgery, and legal medicine. Some methodological considerations were also proposed concerning the following issues: (1) relevant aspects of individual anatomy may arise from the application of methods of ascertainment, and they may be furtherly ascertained through specific anatomical methodology; (2) data about individual anatomy may help in the objective application of the criteria of evaluation (physio-pathological pathway, identification-evaluation of errors, causal value, damage estimation) and in final judgment about medical responsibility/liability. Awareness of the relevance of individual anatomy (risk of iatrogenic lesions, need for preoperative diagnostic procedures) should be one of the principles guiding the clinician; medico-legal analyses can also take advantage of its contribution in terms of ascertainment/evaluation.

Review of Malpractice Litigation in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Venous & Lymphatic Disease

OBJECTIVES

Malpractice claims involving nonthrombotic venous and lymphatic diseases and interventions have not been previously reported. We investigated common reasons for litigation, medical specialties involved, patient injuries, and case outcomes in malpractice litigation involving venous and lymphatic disease.

METHODS

Litigation cases entered into the Westlaw database from June 8th, 1984 to February 15th, 2018 were analyzed. Search terms included relevant words and phrases related to nonthrombotic venous, thoracic outlet syndrome and lymphatic disease and treatment. Data on physician specialty, malpractice claims, patient injuries jury outcomes, amount awarded to the plaintiff, and jury fees were collected and compared for each category.

RESULTS

A total of 144 cases were identified. 41 cases involved varicose veins, 11 spider veins, 35 thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS), 17 other venous diseases, and 40 lymphatic disease. Physician defendants were frequently vascular surgeons (23%) and general surgeons (15%). The majority of litigation claims involved "post-procedure complication" (77%), "lack of informed consent" (25%), "failure to diagnose & treat" (15%), and "intraoperative complications" (13%). The most common injuries were skin damage (27.8%), nerve damage (25%), and lymphedema (24%). Patient death occurred in 6% of cases. Out of venous malpractice cases with post-procedure complications, stab phlebectomy (27%) was the most common intervention followed by foam sclerotherapy (21%), rib resection (21%), laser spider vein removal (5%), and EVLT (3%). Of varicose vein cases, 15% included deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism as post-procedure complications. In TOS rib resections, 65% of cases referenced nerve damage and 12% involved arterial injury. For lymphatic disease cases, general surgeons were frequently identified defendants (25%). Lymphedema (93%) and lymphangitis (7%) occurred as post-procedure complications after breast, gynecologic, orthopedic, and radiation procedures. A majority of complications occurred after breast cases (40%). Verdicts overall ruled in favor of the defendant in 71% (102/144) of cases and the plaintiff in 20% (29/144) of cases. Out of cases ruled in favor of the plaintiff, 31% were lymphatics, 24% varicose veins, and 24% TOS cases. Only 8% (12/144) of cases were settled and one outcome was unknown. The mean award was $820,193 (SD $1,226,008, Range $12,853 - $6,500,000).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of venous and lymphatic litigation cases involve claims of post-procedure complications. Venous complications occurred after open and endovascular treatment of varicose veins, spider vein treatment, and surgical management of TOS. Lymphedema occurred after breast, oncology, and orthopedic procedures. These cases reflect opportunities for intervention to help potentially prevent litigation.

Trial and Error: Learning From Malpractice Claims in Childhood Surgery

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to analyze a nationwide database of malpractice lawsuits involving pediatric surgical patients to identify contributing factors in liability claims.

METHODS

Using the CRICO (Controlled Risk Insurance Company Strategies' Comparative Benchmarking System) database, malpractice claims involving patients ≤18 y old were reviewed from 2008 to 2017. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 844 claims, 76% of the patients were older than age 5. While the average total indemnity paid was $544,325, cases with claimants <1-year-old accounted for 24% of the total indemnity paid, with an average of $1,135,240 per claimant. The most frequently named responsible services were Orthopedics (34%), General Surgery (15%), and Otolaryngology (11%). Fracture or dislocation, appendectomy, skin/breast surgery, arthroscopy, and tonsillectomy/adenoidectomy were among the frequently involved procedures for the cohort of cases. The most common contributing factors for the top procedures involve issues surrounding patient assessment, technical performance, and communication. Cases with a contributing factor of failure to appreciate and reconcile relevant sign/symptom/test results were associated with a higher likelihood of payment (OR 6.6, P < 0.05). Issues surrounding the selection of therapy also led to an increased likelihood of an indemnity payment (OR 2.8, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Malpractice claims related to pediatric surgical procedures involve a wide range of specialties. Patient evaluations, technical performance, and communication are modifiable factors to improve surgical care in children. The contributing factors assigned to each procedure may represent an opportunity for focused improvement to improve patient outcomes.

Volumetric 3-Dimensional Analysis of the Supraorbital vs Pterional Approach to Paramedian Vascular Structures: Comprehensive Assessment of Surgical Maneuverability

BACKGROUND

Both the pterional and supraorbital approaches have been proposed as optimal access corridors to deep and paramedian anatomy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess key intracranial structures accessed through the surgical approaches using the angle of attack (AOA) and the volume of surgical freedom (VSF) methodologies.

METHODS

Ten pterional and 10 supraorbital craniotomies were completed. Data points were measured using a neuronavigation system. A comparative analysis of the craniocaudal AOA, mediolateral AOA, and VSF of the ipsilateral paraclinoid internal carotid artery (ICA), terminal ICA, and anterior communicating artery (ACoA) complex was completed.

RESULTS

For the paraclinoid ICA, the pterional approach produced larger craniocaudal AOA, mediolateral AOA, and VSF than the supraorbital approach (28.06° vs 10.52°, 33.76° vs 23.95°, and 68.73 vs 22.59 mm3 normalized unit [NU], respectively; P < .001). The terminal ICA showed similar superiority of the pterional approach in all quantitative parameters (27.43° vs 11.65°, 30.62° vs 25.31°, and 57.41 vs 17.36 mm3 NU; P < .05). For the ACoA, there were statistically significant differences between the results obtained using the pterional and supraorbital approaches (18.45° vs 10.11°, 29.68° vs 21.01°, and 26.81 vs 16.53 mm3 NU; P < .005).

CONCLUSION

The pterional craniotomy was significantly superior in all instrument maneuverability parameters for approaching the ipsilateral paraclinoid ICA, terminal ICA, and ACoA. This global evaluation of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional surgical freedom and instrument maneuverability by amalgamating the craniocaudal AOA, mediolateral AOA, and VSF produces a comprehensive assessment while generating spatially and anatomically accurate corridor models that provide improved visual depiction for preoperative planning and surgical decision-making.

Medical Malpractice Trends in Foot and Ankle Surgery

Medical malpractice lawsuits can place significant economic and psychologic burden on a provider. Orthopedic surgery is one of the most common subspecialties involved in malpractice claims. There is currently no study examining malpractice lawsuits within foot and ankle surgery. Accordingly, the purpose of this work is to examine trends in malpractice claims in foot and ankle surgery. The Westlaw legal database was queried for lawsuits pertaining to foot and ankle surgery from 2008 to 2018. Only cases involving medical malpractice were included for analysis. All available details pertaining to the cases were collected. This included plaintiff demographic and geographic data. Details regarding the cases were also collected such as anatomical location, pathology, complications, and case outcomes. Forty-nine malpractice lawsuits pertaining to foot and ankle were identified. Most plaintiffs in these cases were adult females, and the majority of cases occurred in the northeast (53.1%). The most common anatomical region involved in claims involved the forefoot (29%). The majority of these claims involved surgery (65%). Infection was the most common complication seen in claims (22%). The jury ruled in favor of the defendant surgeon in most cases (73%). This is the first study to examine trends in medical malpractice within foot and ankle surgery. Infection was the most frequent complication seen in claims and forefoot surgery was the most common anatomic location. A large portion of claims resulted after nonoperative treatment. A better understanding of the trends within malpractice claims is crucial to developing strategies for prevention.

Current Trends and Predictors of Case Outcomes for Malpractice in Colonoscopy in the United States

BACKGROUND

Over 14 million colonoscopies are performed annually, and this procedure remains the largest contributor to malpractice claims against gastroenterologists. The aim of this study was to evaluate reasons for litigation and predictors of case outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cases related to colonoscopy were reviewed within the Westlaw legal database. Patient demographics, reasons for litigation, case payouts, and verdicts were assessed. Multivariate regression was used to determine predictors of defendant verdicts.

RESULTS

A total of 305 cases were included from years 1980 to 2017. Average patient age was 54.9 years (range, 4 to 93) and 52.8% of patients were female. Juries returned defendant and plaintiff verdicts in 51.8% and 25.2% of cases, respectively, and median payout was $995,000. Top reasons for litigation included delay in treatment (65.9%) and diagnosis (65.6%), procedural error (44.3%), and failure to refer (25.6%). Gastroenterologists were defendants in 71% of cases, followed by primary care (32.2%) and surgeons (14.8%). Cases citing informed consent predicted defendant verdict (odds ratio, 4.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.90-9.45) while medication error predicted plaintiff verdict (odds ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.59). Delay in diagnosis (P=0.060) and failure to refer (P=0.074) trended toward plaintiff verdict but did not reach significance. Most represented states were New York (21.0%), California (13.4%), Pennsylvania (13.1%), Massachusetts (12.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Malpractice related to colonoscopy remains a significant and has geographic variability. Errors related to sedation predicted plaintiff verdict and may represent a target to reduce litigation. Primary care physicians and surgeons were frequently cited codefendants, underscoring the significance of interdisciplinary care for colonoscopy.

Does state malpractice environment affect outcomes following spinal fusions? A robust statistical and machine learning analysis of 549,775 discharges following spinal fusion surgery in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Spine surgery is especially susceptible to malpractice claims. Critics of the US medical liability system argue that it drives up costs, whereas proponents argue it deters negligence. Here, the authors study the relationship between malpractice claim density and outcomes.

METHODS

The following methods were used: 1) the National Practitioner Data Bank was used to determine the number of malpractice claims per 100 physicians, by state, between 2005 and 2010; 2) the Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for spinal fusion patients; and 3) the Area Resource File was queried to determine the density of physicians, by state. States were categorized into 4 quartiles regarding the frequency of malpractice claims per 100 physicians. To evaluate the association between malpractice claims and death, discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and total costs, an inverse-probability-weighted regression-adjustment estimator was used. The authors controlled for patient and hospital characteristics. Covariates were used to train machine learning models to predict death, discharge disposition not to home, LOS, and total costs.

RESULTS

Overall, 549,775 discharges following spinal fusions were identified, with 495,640 yielding state-level information about medical malpractice claim frequency per 100 physicians. Of these, 124,425 (25.1%), 132,613 (26.8%), 130,929 (26.4%), and 107,673 (21.7%) were from the lowest, second-lowest, second-highest, and highest quartile states, respectively, for malpractice claims per 100 physicians. Compared to the states with the fewest claims (lowest quartile), surgeries in states with the most claims (highest quartile) showed a statistically significantly higher odds of a nonhome discharge (OR 1.169, 95% CI 1.139-1.200), longer LOS (mean difference 0.304, 95% CI 0.256-0.352), and higher total charges (mean difference [log scale] 0.288, 95% CI 0.281-0.295) with no significant associations for mortality. For the machine learning models-which included medical malpractice claim density as a covariate-the areas under the curve for death and discharge disposition were 0.94 and 0.87, and the R2 values for LOS and total charge were 0.55 and 0.60, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal fusion procedures from states with a higher frequency of malpractice claims were associated with an increased odds of nonhome discharge, longer LOS, and higher total charges. This suggests that medicolegal climate may potentially alter practice patterns for a given spine surgeon and may have important implications for medical liability reform. Machine learning models that included medical malpractice claim density as a feature were satisfactory in prediction and may be helpful for patients, surgeons, hospitals, and payers.

Malpractice trends in shoulder and elbow surgery

BACKGROUND

Medical malpractice is a very common occurrence that many medical providers will have to face; approximately 17,000 medical malpractice cases are filed in the United States each year, and more than 99% of all surgeons are faced with at least 1 instance of malpractice litigation throughout their careers. Malpractice litigation also carries a major economic weight, with medical malpractice spending resulting in an aggregate expenditure of nearly $60 billion annually in the United States. Orthopedic surgery is one of the most common subspecialties involved in malpractice claims. Currently, there are no comprehensive studies examining malpractice lawsuits within shoulder and elbow surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to examine trends in malpractice claims in shoulder and elbow surgery.

METHODS

The Westlaw online legal database was queried in order to identify state and federal jury verdicts and settlements pertaining to shoulder and elbow surgery from 2010-2020. Only cases involving medical malpractice in which an orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgeon was a named defendant were included for analysis. All available details pertaining to the cases were collected. This included plaintiff demographic and geographic data. Details regarding the cases were also collected, such as anatomic location, pathology, complications, and case outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-five malpractice lawsuits pertaining to orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery were identified. Most plaintiffs in these cases were adult men, and the majority of cases were filed in the Southwest (28%) and Midwest (28%) regions of the United States. The most common anatomic region involved in claims was the rotator cuff (32%), followed by the glenohumeral joint (20%). The majority of these claims involved surgery (56%). Pain of mechanical nature was the most common complication seen in claims (56%). The jury ruled in favor of the defendant surgeon in most cases (80%).

DISCUSSION

This is the first study that comprehensively examines the full scope of orthopedic shoulder and elbow malpractice claims across the United States. The most common complaint that plaintiffs reported at the time of litigation was residual pain after treatment due to a mechanical etiology, followed by complaints of nerve damage. A large portion of claims resulted after nonoperative treatment. A better understanding of the trends within malpractice claims is crucial to developing strategies for prevention.

Medical malpractice in aortic valve and mitral valve replacement surgery in North America

BACKGROUND

Aortic and mitral valve replacement are commonly performed by cardiovascular surgeons, but little data quantitatively analyzes the etiology and prevalence of medical malpractice litigations involving these operations. This study aims to analyze incidence, cause, and resolution of medical malpractice lawsuits involving aortic and mitral valve replacements, alone and in combination with coronary artery bypass and/or aortic procedures.

METHODS

The Westlaw legal database was utilized to compile relevant litigations across the United States from 1994-2019. Clinical data, verdict data, demographic data, and litigation attributes were compiled. Fisher-exact tests and Mann-Whitney tests were performed for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred four malpractice litigations involving aortic valve replacement and 55 litigations involving mitral valve replacement were included in this analysis. The mean age of patients was 55.2 years and proportion of female patients was 32.7% in aortic valve replacements litigations, compared to a mean age of 54.1 years and female patients in 61.8% of mitral valve replacements litigations. Significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to monitor the patient and defendant verdicts (p=0.01), delayed treatment and defendant verdicts (p=0.04), and incidence of infective endocarditis and plaintiff verdicts (p=0.04) in aortic valve replacement litigations. Similarly, significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to diagnose and settlement verdicts (p=0.047), and stroke incidence and defendant verdicts (p=0.03) in mitral valve replacement litigations.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to excellent surgeon patient/family communication, administering surgical treatment in a timely manner, diagnosing and acting on concomitant medical conditions, and close patient monitoring may diminish medical malpractice litigation involving aortic and mitral valve replacement operations.

Predictors of Medical Malpractice Outcomes After Spine Surgery: A Comprehensive Analysis From 2010 to 2019

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of spine surgery malpractice cases.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare medical malpractice outcomes among different types of spine surgery and identify predictors of litigation outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spine surgery is highly litigious in the United States with data suggesting favorable outcomes for defendant surgeons. However, factor specific data and explanations for plaintiff verdicts are lacking.

METHODS

Westlaw legal database was queried for spine surgery malpractice outcomes from 2010 to 2019. Clinical data, reasons for litigation, and legal outcomes were tabulated. Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors associated with litigation outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 257 cases were identified for inclusion. There were 98 noninstrumented and 148 instrumented cases; 110 single-level and 99 multilevel; 83 decompressions, 95 decompression and fusions, and 47 fusion only. In all, 182 (71%) resulted in a defendant verdict, 44 (17%) plaintiff verdict, and 31 (12%) settlement. Plaintiff verdicts resulted in payouts of $2.03 million, while settlements resulted in $1.11 million (P=0.34). Common reasons for litigation were intraoperative error, hardware complication, and improper postoperative management. Cases were more likely to result for the plaintiff if postoperative cauda equina syndrome (55% vs. 26%, P<0.01), a surgical site infection (46% vs. 27%, P=0.03), or other catastrophic injury (40% vs. 26%, P=0.03) occurred. Higher monetary awards were associated with multi versus single-level (median: $2.61 vs. $0.92 million, P=0.01), improper postoperative management cited (median: $2.29 vs. $1.12 million, P=0.04), and permanent neurological deficits ($2.29 vs. $0.78 million, P<0.01). Plaintiff payouts were more likely if defendant specialty was neurosurgery versus orthopedic surgery (33% vs. 18%, P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Spine surgery is a litigious field with multiple factors associated with outcomes. Efforts to reduce intraoperative errors and complications may improve patient care and decrease the risk of litigation.

Review of Malpractice Lawsuits in the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Aneurysms and Aortic Dissections

OBJECTIVE

Aortic aneurysms and dissections are prevalent causes of morbidity and mortality. The management of aortic pathologies may be called into question in malpractice suits. Malpractice claims were analyzed to understand common reasons for litigation, medical specialties involved, patient injuries, and outcomes.

METHODS

Litigation cases in the Westlaw database from September 1st, 1987 to October 23 rd, 2019 were analyzed. Search terms included "aortic aneurysm" and "aortic dissection." Data on plaintiff, defendant, litigation claims, patient injuries, misdiagnoses, and case outcomes were collected and compared for aortic aneurysms, aortic dissections, and overall cases.

RESULTS

A total of 346 cases were identified, 196 involving aortic aneurysms and 150 aortic dissections. Physician defendants were emergency medicine (29%), cardiology (20%), internal medicine (14%), radiology (11%), cardiothoracic (10%) and vascular surgery (10%). Litigation claims included "failure to diagnose and treat" (61%), "delayed diagnosis and treatment" (21%), "post-operative complications after open repair" (10%) and "negligent post-operative care" (10%). Patients with aneurysms presented with abdominal (63%) and back pain (37%), while dissections presented with chest pain (78%), abdominal pain (15%), and shortness of breath (14%). Misdiagnoses included gastrointestinal (12%), other cardiovascular (9%), and musculoskeletal conditions (9%), but many were not specified (58%). Overall, 83% of cases were wrongful death suits. Injuries included loss of consortium (23%), emotional distress (19%), and bleeding (17%). In 53% of the cases, the jury ruled in favor of the defendant. 25% of cases ruled for the plaintiff. 22% of cases resulted in a settlement. The mean rewarded for each case was $1,644,590.66 (SD: $5,939,134.58; Range: $17,500-$68,035,462).

CONCLUSION

For aortic pathologies, post-operative complications were not prominent among the reasons why suits were brought forth. This suggests improvements in education across all involved medical specialties may allow for improved diagnostic accuracy and efficient treatment, which could then translate to a decrease in associated litigation cases.

Do neurosurgeons receive more patient complaints than other physicians? Describing who is most at risk and how we can improve

OBJECTIVE

The number of unsolicited patient complaints (UPCs) about surgeons correlates with surgical complications and malpractice claims. Using a large, national patient complaint database, the authors sought to do the following: 1) compare the rates of UPCs for neurosurgeons to those for other physicians, 2) analyze the risk of UPCs with individual neurosurgeon characteristics, and 3) describe the types of UPCs made about neurosurgeons.

METHODS

Patient and family complaint reports among 36,265 physicians, including 423 neurosurgeons, 8292 other surgeons, and 27,550 nonsurgeons who practiced at 33 medical centers (22 academic and 11 regional) from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, were coded with a previously validated Patient Advocacy Reporting System (PARS) algorithm.

RESULTS

Among 423 neurosurgeons, 93% were male, and most (71%) practiced in academic medical centers. Neurosurgical subspecialties included general practice (25%), spine (25%), tumor (16%), vascular (13%), functional (10%), and pediatrics (10%). Neurosurgeons had more average total UPCs per physician (8.68; 95% CI 7.68–9.67) than nonsurgeons (3.40; 95% CI 3.33–3.47) and other surgeons (5.01; 95% CI 4.85–5.17; p < 0.001). In addition, a significantly higher percentage of neurosurgeons received at least one UPC (71.6%; 95% CI 67.3%–75.9%) than did nonsurgeons (50.2%; 95% CI 49.6%–50.8%) and other surgeons (58.2%; 95% CI 57.1%–59.3%; p < 0.001). Factors most associated with increased average UPCs were younger age, measured as median medical school graduation year (1990.5 in the 0-UPC group vs 1993 in the 14+-UPC group, p = 0.009) and spine subspecialty (13.4 mean UPCs in spine vs 7.9 mean UPCs in other specialties, 95% CI 2.3–8.5, p < 0.001). No difference in complaints was seen in those who graduated from non-US versus US medical schools (p = 0.605). The most common complaint types were related to issues surrounding care and treatment, communication, and accessibility, each of which was significantly more common for neurosurgeons than other surgical specialties (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgeons were more likely to generate UPCs than other surgical specialties, and almost 3 out of 4 neurosurgeons (71.6%) had at least one UPC during the study period. Prior studies have shown that feedback to physicians about behavior can result in fewer UPCs. These results suggest that neurosurgeons have opportunities to reduce complaints and potentially improve the overall quality of care delivered.

The jaw-dropping costs of oral cavity cancer malpractice

BACKGROUND

Medical litigation is different than it was 20 years ago due to changes in health care. This study provides an updated analysis of oral cavity malpractice litigation from the past two decades (2000-2010 and 2011-2019).

METHODS

Verdict reviews from the Westlaw database were analyzed from January 2000 to August 2019. Data were collected and analyzed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.

RESULTS

Sixty-five lawsuits were evaluated across 24 states. Failure to diagnose was the most common allegation in both decades. Adjusting for inflation, the average amount awarded from 2000 to 2010 was $1 721 068 and $3 925 504 from 2011 to 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a significant rise in allegations of failure to biopsy and failure to refer (p < 0.05). In addition, while award amounts appear different between decades, the difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.248). Education should focus on early diagnosis, biopsy, and referral to physicians who routinely care for this patient population.

Medical malpractice in heart transplantation from 1994 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation is a unique clinical intervention because it involves two separate parties, the donor and the recipient. This increases the potential for the legal liability of heart teams involved with heart transplantation, but there is no research that exists to date that analyzes the etiology of medical malpractice litigations relating to heart transplantation.

METHODS

The Westlaw legal database was queried for all medical malpractice litigations concerning heart transplantation from 1994 to 2019 in the United States. Individual litigations were reviewed for inclusion, resulting in 41 included cases, and then analyzed for legal and clinical data. Statistical analyses were performed with the Fisher exact test and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients involved in these litigations was 38.88 years, with female patients being younger on average. Female patients received a significantly larger average award than male counterparts (p = .03). Alleged failure to diagnose was significantly associated with settlements (p = .047). An alleged failure to obtain informed consent as presented by the plaintiff was significantly associated with defendant verdicts (p = .03). Incidence of stroke and infection were each significantly associated with nondefendant verdicts (p = .02 and p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

There should be an emphasis on documenting informed consent from all involved parties in heart transplantation to limit litigations filed against clinicians. As technologies and growing donor pools increase the prevalence of heart transplantation, clinicians would be well-served to be aware of legally tenable practices that will allow them to adopt a higher transplant volume without simultaneously adopting added legal exposure.

An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigations in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting from 1994-2019

BACKGROUND

Cardiothoracic surgery is one of the more highly litigated medical specialties, and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) constitutes a substantial portion of cardiothoracic surgery cases. Therefore, understanding litigations relating to CABG would be of benefit to surgeons working to uphold the standards of care that their patients seek and minimize their own legal liability. This study analyzed CABG litigations to identify predictive factors of litigation and verdict type.

METHODS

This study utilized the Westlaw legal database to compile litigations from 1994-2019 across the United States, and resulted in 307 total litigations. After individual screening, 211 litigations met the criteria for inclusion, and were analyzed for demographic, clinical, chronological, and verdict characteristics.

RESULTS

Litigations were present in 33 U.S. states, with California, New York, and Florida having the most litigations. Defendant verdicts were reached in 67.78% of litigations, followed by 20.38% of plaintiff verdicts and 11.85% of settlements. Plaintiff verdicts were associated with the incidence of myocardial infarction during hospitalization. The winter season had the most litigations (42.18%), and the most defendant verdicts (37.76%). Patient mortality occurred in 47.39% of litigations. The most common alleged reason for litigation was a procedural error (55.45%).

CONCLUSIONS

Defendant verdicts were significantly associated with an alleged reason of procedural errors, an alleged reason of a failure to monitor, and congestive heart failure present in patients. The common nature of defendant verdicts, and the significantly greater occurrence of defendant verdicts during the highly-litigated winter season, suggest that surgeons frequently satisfy the legal standard of care.

Medical Malpractice and Vestibular Schwannomas: A Nationwide Review

OBJECTIVE

Most surgeons face litigation related to the care of their patients, with specialties including neurosurgery facing a particularly high risk. Diagnosis and management of vestibular schwannomas can be challenging, potentially giving rise to medicolegal proceedings. Accordingly, a full appreciation of the medicolegal implications of treating these challenging tumors is warranted.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Westlaw Edge legal database was conducted to identify all cases of medicolegal proceedings related to the management of vestibular schwannomas. All cases identified by the search were screened in full, and relevant cases included for analysis. Variables pertaining to the nature of the case and legal outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

A total of 38 cases were included in this analysis from 11 U.S. states. Failure to diagnose and negligent surgery were the most common allegations. Neurosurgeons were the most frequently implicated specialists followed by otolaryngologists and radiologists. A verdict was reached in 30 cases, with the jury finding in favor of the defendant(s) in most cases (n = 26, 87.0%), a proportion that increased across each decade of the study period. Damages were paid out in 11 cases, with a mean value of $1,534,446. Mean value of damages paid in verdicts in favor of the plaintiff were larger than those in settlements ($2,116,543 and $1,385,457, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented provide a comprehensive overview of medicolegal proceedings related to the management of vestibular schwannomas. This study provides clinicians with a greater appreciation of the medicolegal implications of treating vestibular schwannomas.

A detailed analysis of pediatric surgical malpractice claims in Germany: what is the probability of a pediatric surgeon to be accused or convicted?

AIM OF THE STUDY

Pediatric surgeons treat a vulnerable population in which unfavorable outcome can lead to substantial long-term costs, placing them at risk for malpractice claims. This study aims to characterize the frequency and circumstances in which malpractice claims were successfully brought against pediatric surgeons in Germany over the last 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Anonymous data on medical treatment errors and payments were acquired from the Federal Chamber of Physicians from 2014 through 2018 and analyzed for most frequent diagnoses and circumstances that resulted in accusation or conviction. Those claims that were successfully rebutted were compared to as controls. Lifetime risk for being involved in litigation and its outcome was calculated.

RESULTS

There were 129 medical malpractice claims over the 5-year observation period. Medical error was confirmed in 56 cases (43%); the rest were successfully appealed. The risk of the prototypical German pediatric surgeon to be accused was 5.24% and to be convicted 2.27% per year in practice. The most common reasons for conviction (alone or in combination) were surgical-technical errors (23%), treatment delay (21%), insufficient workup (17%), incorrect diagnosis (17%), and incomplete consent (16%).The most frequent circumstances leading to a conviction were trauma (27%), inguinal hernia (7%), circumcision (7%), testicular torsion (7%), acute abdomen (7%), and appendicitis (5%).

CONCLUSION

Over a 40-year career, pediatric surgeons in Germany face an average calculated risk of 2.1 to be accused and 0.9 to be convicted of malpractice claims. Certain circumstances pose higher risks for litigation than others. Knowledge of these patterns may help practitioners avoid medicolegal confrontation.

An Analysis of Political Contributions from Neurosurgeons in the United States

BACKGROUND

As the uncertainty surrounding the future of U.S. health care policy intensifies, political advocacy and campaign contributions have become increasingly relevant. This study describes the trends of political contributions of U.S. neurosurgeons from the years 2003-2019.

METHODS

Individual contribution data from 2003-2019 were obtained from the Federal Election Commission website. Contributions were filtered for occupation lines matching either "neurosurg," "neurologic surgeon," or "neurological surgeon." Each contribution is designated to a recipient committee associated with a political candidate or group. The party designations of these committees were used to catalogue donations as "Republican," "Democratic," or "Independent."

RESULTS

From 2003-2019 a total of 9242 political donations were made by self-identified neurosurgeons amounting to $8,469,121. Most of these contribution dollars were directed to Independent committees (47.9%). Of all Independent contribution dollars from 2005-2019, 95.9% were directed to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Political Action Committee. The total number of unique contributions increased from 442 contributions in 2003 to 650 in 2019. Democrats experienced the most substantial increase in support, from 4.8% of all contribution dollars in 2003 to 26.3% in 2019. Republican support was noted to be more widespread across the United States compared with Democratic support.

CONCLUSIONS

Political contributions from U.S. neurosurgeons have increased steadily over time. Donations were largely Independent but became increasingly partisan in recent years. Overall, this displays an increase in political involvement among the neurosurgeon community. Future studies are warranted into how this involvement translates to representative health policy.

Medical Malpractice and Trigeminal Neuralgia: An Analysis of 49 Cases

PURPOSE

Our study fills the vacancy of litigation research related to trigeminal neuralgia management, giving health care providers the information needed to understand the potential litigious outcomes that follow treatment methods.

METHODS

We queried the Westlaw database to identify litigation cases related to trigeminal neuralgia management. Key variables extracted included medical complaints, trial outcomes, and demographics. Continuous variables were compared between cases in favor of defendant and cases in favor of plaintiff using t-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test. Categorial variables were compared using χ² or Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

About 49 cases met the inclusion criteria-for those cases surgical complications (42.9%) were cited as the most common reasons for malpractice claims. Cranial nerve deficits (34.7%) were the most frequent postoperative complaints. Verdicts ruled in favor of the plaintiff in 26.5% of cases with a mean payout of $1,982,428.46. Dentists were included in the most cases, 63.3%, and the average payout was $415,908, whereas neurosurgeons were involved in 20.4% of cases with an average payout of $618,775. Cases with verdicts in favor of the plaintiff were more likely to be older than cases with verdicts in favor of the defendant (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Over one-half of cases resulted in verdicts in favor of the defendant with surgical complications cited as the most common reason for litigation. Dentistry was the most common individual clinical specialty for defendants, whereas neurosurgery contributed to the largest average payout based on specialty (for n > 1). Cranial nerve deficits were the most common plaintiff postoperative complaints. These analyses may help doctor teams involved in management of trigeminal neuralgia to have a more informed discussion with the patient at every visit so that such litigations may be avoided.

Characteristics and Burden of Diagnostic Error-Related Malpractice Claims in Neurosurgery

BACKGROUND

Neurosurgery is a specialty associated with high risk of malpractice claims, which can be influenced by quality and safety of care. Diagnostic errors have gained increasing attention as a potentially preventable problem. Despite the burden of diagnostic errors, few studies have analyzed diagnostic errors in neurosurgery. We aimed to delineate the effect of diagnostic errors on malpractice claims involving a neurosurgeon.

METHODS

This retrospective study used the national Japanese malpractice claims database and included cases closed between 1961 and 2017. To examine the effect of diagnostic errors in neurosurgery, we compared diagnostic error-related claims (DERCs) with non-DERCs in indemnity, clinical outcomes, and factors relating to neurosurgeons.

RESULTS

There were 95 closed malpractice claims involving neurosurgeons during the study period. Of these claims, 36 (37.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 28.7%-47.9%) were DERCs. Patient death was the most common outcome associated with DERCs. Wrong, delayed, and missed diagnosis occurred in 25 (69.4%, 95% CI 53.1%-82.0%), 4 (11.1%, 95% CI 4.4%-25.3%), and 7 (19.4%, 95% CI 9.8%-35.0%) cases, respectively. The most common presenting medical condition in DERCs was stroke. Subarachnoid hemorrhage, accounting for 85.7% of stroke cases, led to 27.8% of the total indemnity paid in DERCs.

CONCLUSIONS

DERCs are associated with higher numbers of accepted claims and worse outcomes. Identifying diagnostic errors is important in neurosurgery, and countermeasures are required to reduce the burden on neurosurgeons and improve quality. This is the first study to focus on diagnostic errors in malpractice claims arising from neurosurgery.

Status of current medicolegal reform in the United States: a neurosurgical perspective

OBJECTIVE

There are approximately 85,000 lawsuits filed against medical practitioners every year in the US. Among these lawsuits, neurosurgery has been identified as a "high-risk specialty" with exceptional chance of having medical malpractice suits filed. Major issues affecting the overall medicolegal environment include tort reform, the formation of medical review panels, the increasing practice of defensive medicine, and the rising costs of medical insurance. In this study, the authors provide a concise update of the current medicolegal environments of the 50 states and provide a general guide to favorable and unfavorable states in which to practice neurosurgery.

METHODS

Data were acquired related to state-by-state medical review panel status, noneconomic damage caps, economic damage caps, and civil suit filing fees. States were placed into 5 categories based on the status of their current medicolegal environment.

RESULTS

Of the 50 states in the US, 18 have established a medical review panel process. Fifteen states have a mandatory medical review process, whereas 3 states rely on a voluntary process. Thirty-five states have tort reform and have placed a cap on noneconomic damages. These caps range from $250,000 to $2,350,000, with the median cap of $465,900. Only 8 states have placed a cap on total economic damages. These caps range from $500,000 to $2,350,000, with the median cap of $1,050,000. All states have a filing fee for a medical malpractice lawsuit. These costs range from $37 to $884, with the median cost for filing of $335.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicolegal healthcare reform will continue to play a vital role in physicians' lives. It will dictate if physicians may practice proactively or be forced to act defensively. With medicolegal reform varying greatly among states, it will ultimately dictate if physicians move into or away from certain states and thus guide the availability of healthcare services. A desirable legal system for neurosurgeons, including caps on economic and noneconomic damages and availability of medical review panels, can lead to safer practice.

Disciplinary law and neurosurgery: a 10-year analysis of cases in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

Neurosurgery is historically seen as a high-risk medical specialty, with a large percentage of neurosurgeons facing complaints during their careers. The Dutch medicolegal system is characterized by a strong emphasis on informal mediation, which can be accompanied or followed by disciplinary actions. To determine if this system is associated with a low overall risk for medical litigation through disciplinary law, the authors conducted a review of disciplinary cases involving neurosurgeons in the Netherlands.

METHODS

The authors reviewed legal cases that had been filed against consultant neurosurgeons and neurosurgical residents under the Dutch disciplinary law for medical professions between 2009 and 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 1322 neurosurgical care-related cases from 2009 to 2019 were reviewed. Fifty-seven (4.3%) cases were filed against neurosurgeons (40 first-instance cases, 17 appeal cases). In total, 123 complaints were filed in the 40 first-instance cases. Most of these cases were related to spine surgery (62.5%), followed by cranial surgery (27.5%), peripheral nerve surgery (7.5%), and pediatric neurosurgery (2.5%). Complaints were filed in all stages of care but were mostly related to preoperative and intraoperative care.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk for medically related litigation in neurosurgery in the Netherlands through disciplinary law is low but not negligible. Although the absolute number of cases is low, spinal neurosurgery was found to be a risk factor for complaints. The relatively high number of cases that involved the sharing of information suggests that specific improvements-focusing on communication-can be made in order to lower the risk for future litigation.

Determinants of brain tumor malpractice litigation outcome and indemnity payments: a 29-year nationwide analysis

OBJECTIVE

Medical malpractice litigation is a significant challenge in neurosurgery, with more than 25% of a neurosurgeon’s career on average spent with an open malpractice claim. While earlier research has elucidated characteristics of litigation related to brain tumor treatment, factors impacting outcome and indemnity payment amount are incompletely understood.

METHODS

The authors identified all medical malpractice cases related to brain tumors from 1988 to 2017 in VerdictSearch, a database of 200,000 cases from all 50 states. The outcome for each case was dichotomized from the perspective of the defendant physician as favorable (defendant victory) or unfavorable (plaintiff victory or settlement). Indemnity payments were recorded for cases that resulted in settlement or plaintiff victory. Univariate regression was used to assess the association between case characteristics and case outcome as well as indemnity payment amount. Subsequently, significant variables were used to generate multivariate models for each outcome. Statistical significance was maintained at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 113 cases were analyzed, resulting most commonly in defendant (physician) victory (46.9%), followed by settlement and plaintiff victory (both 26.5%). The most common specialty of the primary defendant was neurosurgery (35.4%), and the most common allegation was improper diagnosis (59.3%). Indemnity payments totaled $191,621,392, with neurosurgical defendants accounting for $109,000,314 (56.9%). The average payments for cases with a plaintiff victory ($3,333,654) and for settlements ($3,051,832) did not significantly differ (p = 0.941). The highest rates of unfavorable outcomes were observed among radiologists (63.6%) and neurosurgeons (57.5%) (p = 0.042). On multivariate regression, severe disability was associated with a lower odds of favorable case outcome (OR 0.21, p = 0.023), while older plaintiff age (> 65 years) predicted higher odds of favorable outcome (OR 5.75, p = 0.047). For 60 cases resulting in indemnity payment, higher payments were associated on univariate analysis with neurosurgeon defendants (β-coefficient = 2.33, p = 0.017), whether the plaintiff underwent surgery (β-coefficient = 2.11, p = 0.012), and the plaintiff experiencing severe disability (β-coefficient = 4.30, p = 0.005). Following multivariate regression, only medical outcome was predictive of increased indemnity payments, including moderate disability (β-coefficient = 4.98, p = 0.007), severe disability (β-coefficient = 6.96, p = 0.001), and death (β-coefficient = 3.23, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgeons were the most common defendants for brain tumor malpractice litigation, averaging more than $3 million per claim paid. Older plaintiff age was associated with case outcome in favor of the physician. Additionally, medical outcome was predictive of both case outcome and indemnity payment amount.

Medical malpractice in spine surgery: a review

Medical malpractice is an important but often underappreciated topic within neurosurgery, particularly for surgeons in the early phases of practice. The practice of spinal neurosurgery involves substantial risk for litigation, as both the natural history of the conditions being treated and the operations being performed almost always carry the risk of permanent damage to the spinal cord or nerve roots, a cardiopulmonary event, death, or other dire outcomes. In this review, the authors discuss important topics related to medical malpractice in spine surgery, including tort reform, trends and frequency of litigation claims in spine surgery, wrong-level and wrong-site surgery, catastrophic outcomes including spinal cord injury and death, and ethical considerations.

Perceptions of Indian neurosurgeons about medicolegal issues and malpractice suits

OBJECTIVE

Despite the rising trend of medicolegal challenges in India, there is an absolute dearth of literature from India on this issue. The authors conducted a survey, to their knowledge a first of its kind, to assess the perceptions of Indian neurosurgeons about the medicolegal challenges faced in everyday practice.

METHODS

An anonymous online survey performed using Google Forms was widely circulated among neurosurgeons practicing in India via email and social media platforms. The questionnaire consisted of 38 questions covering the various aspects of medicolegal issues involved in neurosurgery practice.

RESULTS

A total of 221 survey responses were received, out of which 214 responses were included in the final analysis, barring 7 responders who had no work experience in India. The respondents were categorized according to their working arrangements and work experience. Out of all of the respondents, 20 (9.3%) had ≥ 1 malpractice suits filed against them. More than 90% of the respondents believed that malpractice suits are on the rise in India. Almost half of the respondents believed the advent of teleconsultation is further compounding the risk of malpractice suits, and 66.4% of respondents felt that they were inadequately trained during residency to deal with medicolegal issues. Most respondents (88.8%) felt that neurosurgeons working in the government sector had lesser chances of facing litigations in comparison to those working in the private sector. The practice of obtaining video proof of consent was more commonly reported by respondents working in freelancing and private settings (45.1%) and those with multiple affiliations (61.3%) compared to respondents practicing in government settings (22.8%) (p < 0.001). Neurosurgeons working in the private sector were more likely to alter management and refer sick patients to higher-volume treatment centers to avoid malpractice suits than their government counterparts (p = 0.043 and 0.006, respectively). The practices pertaining to legal preparedness were also found to be significantly higher among the respondents from the private sector (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey highlights the apprehensions of neurosurgeons in India with regard to rising malpractice suits and the subsequent increase of defensive neurosurgical practices, especially in the private sector. A stronger legal framework for providing for quick redress of patient complaints, while deterring frivolous malpractice suits, can go a long way to allay these fears. There is a dire need for systematic training of neurosurgeons regarding legal preparedness, which should begin during residency.

Sovereign immunity and its implications for neurosurgery

The proportion of neurosurgeons facing a malpractice suit each year is highest among all medical and surgical specialties. It is critical for neurosurgeons to understand local malpractice laws because they vary among states. Sovereign immunity, as described in the 11th constitutional amendment, provides absolute immunity to states from being sued by their residents and by other states. A state may waive its sovereign immunity, however, and substitute itself as the defendant in place of a state-employed physician in the court of law. This means that a physician working for a state-funded hospital may not be liable to a malpractice suit. Further provisions of the law allow the state not to pay indemnity beyond a certain limit, which discourages plaintiff attorneys from pursuing indemnity charges against physicians working for state-funded institutions. In this review, the authors describe the concept of sovereign immunity and its implications for the practice of neurosurgery.

Medical malpractice and meningiomas: an analysis of 47 cases

OBJECTIVE

Among medical practices, surgical fields, including neurosurgery, are at a high risk for medical malpractice litigation. With meningiomas contributing to 10% of the total neurosurgery litigation cases, the aim of this study was to identify demographic characteristics, reasons for litigation, and surgical complications commonly reported in these cases. This analysis serves to increase neurosurgeons’ awareness of factors associated with medical malpractice litigation.

METHODS

The online legal database Westlaw was utilized to query public litigation cases related to the medical management of meningiomas between December 1985 and May 2020. Variables extracted included the following: plaintiff and defendant demographics, litigation category, plaintiff medical complaints, and trial outcomes. The authors compared these characteristics between cases with decisions in favor of the defendant and those with decisions in favor of the plaintiff.

RESULTS

A total of 47 cases met the inclusion criteria. Failure to diagnose (68.1%) was the most common type of malpractice claim, and surgical complications (19.1%), motor weakness (33%), and financial loss (33%) were cited as the most common postoperative complaints. Individual specialties that most often required defense due to malpractice claims were radiology (21.7%) and neurosurgery (19.6%). The jury verdict was in favor of the defense in 51.1% of cases and in favor of the plaintiff in 27.7% of cases. A settlement was reached in 19.1% of cases. The mean payout for a verdict in favor of the plaintiff was $3,409,650.22, while the mean payout for settlements was $867,555.56. The greatest average payout for specialties was in neurosurgery at $3,414,400, followed by radiology at $3,192,960. Cases with a verdict in favor of the plaintiff were more likely to involve an internal medicine physician as a defendant (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Over one-half of the cases resulted in a defendant’s verdict with failure to diagnose cited as the most common reason for litigation. Radiology and neurosurgery were the most common specialties for legal cases and also had some of the largest average payouts based on specialty. Motor weakness and financial loss were the most common plaintiff postoperative complaints. These findings may inform surgeons on active measures to take, such as increasing focus on diagnostic accuracy and reducing specific postoperative complaints, such as motor weakness, through risk management and prophylactic measures, to reduce unfavorable legal outcomes.

Malpractice and socioeconomic aspects in neurosurgery: a developing-country reality

OBJECTIVE

Neurosurgery occupies a prominent place in medical malpractice, but cases are still underreported in Brazil. This study describes the socioeconomic issues of medical malpractice in neurosurgery procedures and how they culminate in unfavorable outcomes in a developing country.

METHODS

The authors analyzed 112 neurosurgical procedures listed in the Brazilian Hospital Information System (Sistema de Informações Hospitalares do Sistema Único de Saúde [SIHSUS]) records in the DATASUS (Departamento de Informática do SUS) database between January 2008 and February 2020. Malpractice data were collected using the JusBrasil platform, with the authors searching the name of each of the 112 neurosurgical procedures plus “medical malpractice” among the jurisprudence records for January 2008 to February 2020. A simple linear regression analysis was performed using appropriate software. Analyses were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

According to DATASUS, 842,041 neurosurgical procedures were performed by the Brazilian Unified Health System between January 2008 and February 2020. The mean hospitalization cost for neurosurgical procedures was $714.06, and the average amount paid to professionals per procedure was $145.28 with variations according to the type of practice (public or private) in which they were performed, the complexity of the procedure, and the Brazilian region. The mortality rate and mean length of stay for neurosurgical procedures were 11.37% and 10.15 days, respectively. There were 79 medical malpractice lawsuits in the studied period. In these lawsuits, 26.58% of the court decisions were unfavorable to the neurosurgeons, with a mean compensation per procedure 15 times higher than the median value paid for all professionals in a neurosurgical procedure. The spine subspecialty had more lawsuits, and the brain tumor subspecialty had the most expensive compensation.

A lack of resources in public healthcare negatively impacts inpatient care. The mortality rate was 1.5 times higher in public practice than in private practice and was inversely proportional to the MTCs paid for the neurosurgical procedure. Patients with the lower educational levels associated with limited access to good medical care could reflect the lower plaintiff motivation in regions with a low gross domestic product and Human Development Index. In most cases, there is no understanding from either the patient or his family about the health-disease process, nor that there was medical malpractice committed by the physician to be sued.

CONCLUSIONS

The socioeconomic inequalities and the population’s low awareness of their rights could explain the few malpractice cases reported in Brazil. The authors recommend better decisions regarding the investments to be made in neurosurgical procedures to reduce malpractice lawsuits.

Experiences of neurological surgeons with malpractice lawsuits

OBJECTIVE

As a specialty that treats acute pathology and refractory pain, neurosurgery is at risk for high liability, making the practice of defensive medicine quite common. The extent to which the practice of defensive medicine is linked to experience with malpractice lawsuits remains unclear. The aims of this study were to clarify this by surveying neurosurgeons about the frequency of experiencing medical lawsuits and to show how neurosurgeons reflect on facing such lawsuits.

METHODS

A survey consisting of 24 questions was distributed among members of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. The survey consisted of four parts: 1) demographics of participants; 2) the way malpractice lawsuits affect the way respondents practice medicine; 3) experiences with medical malpractice lawsuits; and 4) the effect of the medical malpractice environment on one's own practice of medicine.

RESULTS

There were a total of 490 survey respondents, 83.5% of whom were employed in the US. Of the respondents, 39.5% stated they were frequently or always concerned about being sued, and 77.4% stated their fear had led to a change in how they practice medicine. For 58.4%, this change led to the practice of defensive medicine, while for others it led to more extensive documentation (14.3%) and/or to referring or dropping complex cases (12.4%).Among the respondents, 80.9% at some time were named in a medical malpractice lawsuit and 12.3% more than 10 times. The main concerns expressed about being sued included losing confidence and practicing defensive medicine (17.8%), personal assets being at risk (16.9%), and being named in the National Practitioner Data Bank (15.6%). Given the medical malpractice environment, 58.7% of respondents considered referring complex patient cases, whereas 36.5% considered leaving the practice of medicine. The fear of being sued (OR 4.06, 95% CI 2.53-6.51) and the consideration of limiting the scope of practice (OR 3.08, 1.80-5.20) were both independently associated with higher odds of considering leaving the practice of medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

The current medicolegal landscape has a profound impact on neurosurgical practice. The fear of being sued, the financial aspects of practicing defensive medicine, and the proportion of neurosurgeons who are considering leaving the practice of medicine emphasize the need for a shift in the medicolegal landscape to a system in which fear of being sued does not play a dominant role and the interests of patients are protected.

Delayed Diagnosis Is the Primary Cause of Sarcoma Litigation: Analysis of Malpractice Claims in the United States

BACKGROUND

Sarcoma care is highly litigated in medical malpractice claims. Understanding the reasons for litigation and legal outcomes in sarcoma care may help physicians deliver more effective and satisfying care to patients while limiting their legal exposure. However, few studies have described malpractice litigation in sarcoma care.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What percentage of sarcoma malpractice cases result in a defendant verdict? (2) What is the median indemnity payment for cases that result in a plaintiff verdict or settlement? (3) What are the most common reasons for litigation, injuries sustained, and medical specialties of the defendant physicians? (4) What are the factors associated with plaintiff verdicts or settlements and higher indemnity payments?

METHODS

The national medicolegal database Westlaw was queried for medical malpractice cases pertaining to sarcomas that reached verdicts or settlements. Cases from 1982 to 2018 in the United States were included in the study to evaluate for trends in sarcoma litigation. Demographic and clinical data, tumor characteristics, reasons for litigation, injuries, and legal outcomes were recorded for each case. A univariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with plaintiff verdicts or settlements and higher indemnity payments, such as tumor characteristics, defendant's medical or surgical specialty, reason for litigation, and injuries sustained. A total of 92 cases related to sarcomas were included in the study, of which 40 were related to bone sarcomas and 52 were related to soft-tissue sarcomas. Eighty-five percent (78 of 92) of cases involved adult patients (mean age ± SD: 40 ± 15 years) while 15% (14 of 92) of cases involved pediatric patients (mean age ± SD: 12.5 ± 5 years).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight percent (35 of 92) of the included cases resulted in a defendant verdict, 30% (28 of 92) resulted in a plaintiff verdict, and 32% (29 of 92) resulted in a settlement. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) indemnity payment for plaintiff verdicts and settlements was USD 1.9 million (USD 0.5 to USD 3.5 million). Median (IQR) indemnity payments were higher for cases resulting in a plaintiff verdict than for cases that resulted in a settlement (USD 3.3 million [1.1 to 5.7 million] versus USD 1.2 million [0.4 to 2.4 million]; difference of medians = USD 2.2 million; p = 0.008). The most common reason for litigation was delayed diagnosis of sarcoma (91%; 84 of 92) while the most common injuries cited were progression to metastatic disease (51%; 47 of 92) and wrongful death (41%; 38 of 92). Malpractice claims were most commonly filed against primary care physicians (26%; 28 of 109 defendants), nononcology-trained orthopaedic surgeons (23%; 25 of 109), and radiologists (15%; 16 of 109). Cases were more likely to result in a ruling in favor of the plaintiff or settlement if a delay in diagnosis occurred despite suspicious findings on imaging or pathologic findings (80% versus 51%; odds ratio 3.84 [95% CI 1.34 to 11.03]; p = 0.02). There were no differences in indemnity payments with the numbers available in terms of tumor type, tumor location, defendant specialty, reason for litigation, and resulting injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Many lawsuits were made against primary care physicians, nononcology-trained orthopaedic surgeons, or radiologists for a delayed diagnosis of sarcoma despite the presence of imaging or histologic findings suspicious for malignancy. Although previous studies of bone and soft-tissue sarcomas have not shown a consistent association between time to diagnosis and decreased survival, our study suggests that physicians are still likely to lose these lawsuits because of the perceived benefits of an early diagnosis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Physicians can mitigate their malpractice risk while reducing delays in diagnosis of sarcomas by carefully reviewing all existing diagnostic studies, establishing closed-loop communication protocols to communicate critical findings from diagnostic studies, and developing policies to facilitate second-opinion consultation, particularly for imaging studies, with an experienced sarcoma specialist. Musculoskeletal oncologists may be able to help further reduce the rates of malpractice litigation in sarcoma care by helping patients understand that delays in diagnosis do not necessarily constitute medical malpractice.

Medical Malpractice Trends in Thyroidectomies among General Surgeons and Otolaryngologists

Objectives

This study aims to examine litigation trends with thyroidectomies in the United States from 1984 to 2018.

Methods

We used the Westlaw legal database to collect data on the defendant, plaintiff, case demographics, alleged reasons for malpractice, additional complications, and case outcomes.

Results

The most common reason for litigation was vocal cord paralysis (51%, n = 28), with the majority ruling in favor of the defendant (64%, P = .042). Of those, 43% of cases (n = 12) were due to unilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury, and 39% (n = 11) were due to bilateral RLN injury. Of the claims due to vocal cord paralysis that resulted in indemnity payment (36%), the majority included additional damages, such as lack of informed consent (30%) or subsequent damages from permanent tracheostomy (40%), which is usually a result of bilateral nerve paralysis.

Conclusion

RLN injury was the most common complication leading to trial, with most cases ruling in favor of the defense. However, most verdicts that favored the plaintiff or those that settled were due to subsequent damages from bilateral nerve paralysis, such as permanent tracheostomy. We encourage surgeons to consider a staged procedure in high-risk cases or cases with signal loss. There needs to be a bigger emphasis on informed consent in the training of surgeons. Surgeons should educate patients at high risk on potential surgical complications that may drastically affect their quality of life.

Systematic Review of Malpractice Litigation in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Stroke

Background and Purpose—

The emergency management of stroke is complex and highly time-sensitive. Recent landmark trials demonstrating the strong benefit of thrombectomy have led to rapid change in stroke management. This article reviews a large number of medical malpractice lawsuits related to the emergency management of stroke to characterize factors involved in these lawsuits.

Methods—

Three large legal databases were used to search for jury verdicts and settlements in cases related to the acute care of stroke patients in the United States. Search terms included “stroke” and “medical malpractice.” Cases were screened to include only cases in which the allegation involved negligence in the acute care of a patient suffering a stroke.

Results—

We found 246 medical malpractice cases related to the acute management of ischemic stroke and 26 related to intracranial hemorrhage. Seventy-one cases specifically alleged a failure to treat with tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) and 7 cases alleged a failure to treat, or to timely treat, with thrombectomy. Overall there were 151 cases (56%) which ended with no payout, 74 cases (27%) were settled out of court, and 47 cases (17%) went to court and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff. The average payout in settlements was $1 802 693, and the average payout in plaintiff verdicts was $9 705 099.

Conclusions—

Malpractice litigation is a risk in acute stroke care and can lead to significant financial consequences. The majority of malpractice lawsuits related to the emergency management of stroke allege a failure to diagnose and failure to treat. Allegations of a failure to treat acute ischemic stroke with tPA were frequently found and are common in lawsuits. Allegations of a failure to treat a large vessel occlusion with thrombectomy were less frequently found. Given recent changes in practice guidelines and the demonstrated strong treatment effect of thrombectomy, it is likely that such litigation will increase in the coming years.

Impressions of Osteopathic Neurosurgeon on Preparedness for Practice: Survey Results from the American College of Osteopathic Surgeons

Introduction Neurosurgeons trained in the US are rigorously educated on the surgical management of neurosurgical conditions. These neurosurgeons have been trained through one of two avenues: the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or the American Osteopathic Association (AOA). With the formation of a single accreditation system from the AOA and ACGME accrediting bodies and significant changes introduced in the training of neurosurgeons from both bodies, we sought to identify common practice parameters and perceptions of preparedness of AOA-trained neurosurgeons. Methods  A survey was conducted through the neurosurgery section of the American College of Osteopathic Surgeons (ACOS), requesting responses from attending neurosurgeons who completed AOA neurosurgery residency. Responses were obtained through an anonymous, web-based system using single-select multiple-choice questions. Results  In total, 52 neurosurgeons participated in the survey. The majority of the 52 respondents practiced in non-academic settings in urban areas and were exposed to a wide variety of practice environments in terms of case volume and clinical responsibilities. Significantly, 96.15% of the respondents said they felt adequately prepared for neurosurgical practice after their AOA training.  Conclusion  Overall, this study highlights both the similarities and variances in practices of osteopathic neurosurgeons. The majority of the participants feel that their training has appropriately prepared them for practice and they are skilled surgeons capable of caring for the safety and well-being of numerous patients in a variety of settings. Most of them practice primarily in private-practice settings at urban centers. Overall, osteopathic neurosurgeons trained in AOA programs report that their training has equipped them well for careers in neurosurgery.

An analysis of malpractice litigation in the surgical management of carotid artery disease

OBJECTIVE

Carotid artery disease is a common illness that can pose a significant risk if left untreated. Treatment via carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) can also lead to complications. Given the risk of adverse events related to treating, or failing to treat, carotid artery disease, this is a possible area for litigation. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the medicolegal factors involved in treating patients suffering carotid artery disease and to compare litigation related to CEA and CAS.

METHODS

Three large legal databases were used to search for jury verdicts and settlements in cases related to untreated carotid artery disease, CEA, and CAS. Search terms included "endarterectomy," "medical malpractice," "carotid," "stenosis," "stenting," "stent," and combinations of those words. Three types of cases were considered relevant: 1) cases in which the primary allegation was negligence performing a CEA or perioperative care (CEA-related cases); 2) cases in which the primary allegation was negligence performing a CAS or perioperative care (CAS-related cases); and 3) cases in which the plaintiff alleged that a CEA or CAS should have been performed (failure-to-treat [FTT] cases).

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-four CEA-related cases, 3 CAS-related cases, and 67 FTT cases were identified. Cases resulted in 133 verdicts for the defense (59%), 64 settlements (29%), and 27 plaintiff verdicts (12%). The average payout in cases that were settled outside of court was $1,097,430 and the average payout in cases that went to trial and resulted in a plaintiff verdict was $2,438,253. Common allegations included a failure to diagnose and treat carotid artery disease in a timely manner, treating with inappropriate indications, procedural error, negligent postprocedural management, and lack of informed consent. Allegations of a failure to timely treat known carotid artery disease were likely to lead to a payout (60% of cases involved a payout). Allegations of procedural error, specifically where the resultant injury was nerve injury, were relatively less likely to lead to a payout (28% of cases involved a payout).

CONCLUSIONS

Both diagnosing and treating carotid artery disease has serious medicolegal implications and risks. In cases resulting in a plaintiff verdict, the payouts were significantly higher than cases resolved outside the courtroom. Knowledge of common allegations in diagnosing and treating carotid artery disease as well as performing CEA and CAS may benefit neurosurgeons. The lack of CAS-related litigation suggests these procedures may entail a lower risk of litigation compared to CEA, even accounting for the difference in the frequency of both procedures.

Malpractice Litigation in Brain Tumor Surgery: A 31-Year Analysis of Causative Factors in the United States from the Westlaw Database

BACKGROUND

Medical malpractice litigation is an issue of major concern in neurosurgery, with 19.1% of neurosurgeons facing a claim annually. Neurosurgery possesses the greatest risk of malpractice of any specialty, likely owing to the complex clinical environment and disease severity. In the present study, we have characterized such litigation to determine the common factors that compel plaintiffs to file these claims.

METHODS

WestLawNext, a prominent legal database, was used to identify all cases from 1985 to 2016 related to brain tumors. A total of 225 cases were identified, and each was analyzed for the cause of litigation (multiple causes were permitted). Because many had >1 ground for litigation, the reported percentages were based on the total counts of litigation rather than the number of cases. Additional information was collected from each case, including location, tumor type, and physician specialty.

RESULTS

The cases were distributed across 36 states and U.S. territories: California (n = 42; 20%) and New York (n = 28; 13%) had the greatest number of cases. The top reasons for litigation were failure to diagnose (n = 109; 28%), failure to treat (n = 72; 18%), procedural error (n = 63; 16%), and failure to refer for diagnostic tests (n = 55; 14%). The most common diagnoses included pituitary adenoma (n = 26; 12%), acoustic neuroma (n = 27; 12%), and meningioma (n = 23; 10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Malpractice litigation contributes to high overhead and physician burnout and escalates the cost of patient care. We found that benign brain tumors were the most common in litigation and that surgical issues accounted for only a small percentage.