Factors Associated With Physician Loss in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Malpractice Lawsuits

Arthroscopy in India Through the Medicolegal Lens: A Comprehensive Review

Introduction

With the increasing number of Arthroscopic surgeries, comes with it, the undesirable problem of litigation associated with it. Arthroscopy does possess certain unique aspects which need to be understood from the legal point of view as well.

Materials and Methods

We obtained information on specific medico-legal cases involving arthroscopy from books and websites containing collections of medico-legal judgments in Indian legal courts, consumer dispute redressal forums at the state and national levels, and state medical councils..

Results

We assimilated and analysed all this information, combined it with our experience in the field of medical law, and have provided practical, enforceable ways to decrease the medicolegal risk for arthroscopy surgeons.

Conclusion

This review provides a comprehensive overview of pressing issues in relation to the medicolegal aspects of arthroscopic surgery.

Medical malpractice litigation after total shoulder arthroplasty: a comprehensive analysis based on the Westlaw legal database

INTRODUCTION

Orthopedic surgery is one of the most common subspecialties subject to medical malpractice claims. Although total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is associated with favorable patient outcomes and relatively low complication rates, surgeons performing this procedure may be subject to malpractice litigation leading to significant economic and psychological burden on the provider. The purpose of this study is to characterize and describe malpractice claims against orthopedic surgeons performing TSA using the Westlaw legal database.

METHODS

The Westlaw legal database was queried for all cases related to TSA using the terms "malpractice" AND "shoulder replacement" OR "shoulder arthroplasty." Cases were excluded if the defendant was not an orthopedic surgeon, the procedure involved was not a TSA, or if the patient was a minor. Patient demographics, causes cited for litigation, case outcomes, and indemnity payments were analyzed to determine common factors that lead plaintiffs to pursue legal action.

RESULTS

Thirty-five TSA cases were identified that met inclusion criteria. The mean plaintiff age was 55 years with 63.6% female. The most common category of negligence alleged was intraoperative error, which occurred in 25 claims (71%). The most common types of damages incurred were nerve injury (23%), functional limitation (20%), and infection (17%). Overall, 27 cases (77%) resulted in a defense verdict. Four cases (11%) resulted in settlements and 4 cases (11%) resulted in plaintiff verdicts. The average inflation-adjusted monetary award in these cases was $1,619,919 (standard deviation, $1,689,452).

DISCUSSION

This study provides a comprehensive summary of malpractice claims and associated outcomes in TSA. Given the rapidly increasing rate of TSA in the United States and the burden of associated malpractice claims, understanding potential legal implications of TSA is of great value to orthopedic surgeons. Intraoperative error was the category of negligence cited most commonly in TSA malpractice claims. Nerve injury, functional limitation, and infection were the most commonly cited specific damages. These findings highlight the need for orthopedic surgeons to educate patients regarding potential postoperative complications while continuing to focus on minimizing their occurrence.

Hip & Knee Are the Most Litigated Orthopaedic Cases: A Nationwide 5-Year Analysis of Medical Malpractice Claims

BACKGROUND

Approximately 80% of hip and knee surgeons will face malpractice litigation. Understanding contemporary reasons for litigation and legal outcomes in our field may help surgeons deliver more effective and satisfying care, while limiting their legal exposure. This study aimed to determine: 1) which orthopaedic subspecialties were most frequently litigated; 2) malpractice damages and negligence claimed; 3) the proportion of different case outcomes; and 4) factors associated with defense verdicts.

METHODS

A nationwide database was queried for all orthopaedic medical malpractice claims (2015 to 2020), obtaining 164 claims from 17 states. Variables included were as follows: case outcome, indemnity payment, damages, negligence claimed, treatment, and patient characteristics. A binary logistic regression determined if any collected variable increased the likelihood of a defense verdict.

RESULTS

Hip and knee cases were the highest-represented (n = 49, 29.9%; knee: n = 26, 15.9%; hip: n = 23, 14.0%), followed by the spine (n = 36; 22.0%), trauma (n = 29;17.7%), hand and wrist (n = 16; 9.8%), sports (n = 16; 9.1%), foot and ankle (n = 7; 4.3%), pediatric (n = 6; 3.7%), and shoulder (n = 6; 3.7%). Within hip and knee surgery, defense verdicts occurred in 38 cases (77.6%), while 9 (18.4%) resulted in plaintiff verdicts (mean payment: $4,866,929) and 2 (4.1%) resulted in settlements (mean settlement: $1,550,000). Nonreversible damages (eg, paralysis, amputation, and death; P < .001) were associated with a decreased likelihood of a defense outcome.

CONCLUSION

Hip and knee cases were the highest-represented in orthopaedic malpractice litigation. Surgeons were more frequently found negligent when nonreversible damages occurred. Orthopaedic surgeons should be cognizant of litigation patterns while ensuring patient-centered high-quality care.

Presoaking ACL Grafts in Vancomycin Decreases the Frequency of Postoperative Septic Arthritis: A Cohort Study of 29,659 Patients, Systematic Review, and Meta-analysis From the SANTI Study Group

Background:

Presoaking anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts in vancomycin has been reported to reduce the occurrence of septic arthritis (SA). However, strong recommendations for its universal use have been precluded by concerns regarding the fragility of previous meta-analyses.

Purpose:

The primary objective was to investigate whether presoaking ACL grafts in vancomycin was associated with a reduction in the rate of SA in a large series of patients. The secondary objective was to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of vancomycin in reducing the rate of SA.

Study Design:

Cohort study and systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) at our institution was undertaken. Rates of postoperative SA were determined and analyzed according to whether patients had received grafts presoaked in vancomycin. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was performed. Odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of SA were calculated according to the inverse variance approach. Results were presented using forest plots, funnel plots, and the fragility index.

Results:

A total of 5300 patients underwent primary ACLR during the study period. The rate of SA was 0.34% (11/3228) in the control group and 0.05% (1/2072) in the presoaked group. There was a 5-fold greater risk of SA in patients who did not receive grafts presoaked in vancomycin (OR, 5.13 [95% CI, 1.16-48.30]; P = .04). Overall, 11 studies were included in the systematic review (29,659 ACLR procedures). The meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly greater risk of SA in those patients who did not receive grafts presoaked in vancomycin (OR, 14.39 [95% CI, 5.90-35.10]; fragility index = 23). This finding held true for the subpopulation receiving hamstring tendon grafts (fragility index = 16), but only a trend was demonstrated for bone–patellar tendon–bone grafts.

Conclusion:

The meta-analysis demonstrated that presoaking ACL grafts in vancomycin was associated with significant reductions in the rates of SA when all graft types were analyzed together. This finding held true specifically for hamstring tendon autografts. The fragility index of these findings allows for a strong recommendation for the universal use of vancomycin presoaking. However, it should be noted that only a trend toward reduced SA rates was demonstrated with presoaking bone–patellar tendon–bone autografts in vancomycin.

Analysis of Medical Malpractice Outcomes for Sports Orthopedic Procedures

Orthopedic sports medicine surgeons are especially vulnerable to litigation, largely because of high patient expectations in the setting of complex surgeries. Understanding the factors associated with litigation may reduce physician risk as well as optimize patient satisfaction and outcomes. We used a national medicolegal database to search for medical malpractice verdicts and out-of-court settlements involving common sports injuries and their surgical management between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2018. Univariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of case outcome and monetary awards. We identified 777 cases, but only 328 met the inclusion criteria. Of the 328 cases included in our study, 231 (70.4%) resulted in a defendant verdict, 75 (22.9%) resulted in a plaintiff verdict, and 22 (6.7%) resulted in a settlement. The most common reason for litigation was intraoperative error (183 cases, 55.8%). No statistically significant difference was found between monetary awards for plaintiff verdicts vs settlements (mean award of $1.29 million and $0.72 million, respectively, P=.07). Cases in which the plaintiff claimed neurovascular injury were significantly more likely to result in a higher monetary award (mean award of $2.37 million, P=.02). Cases involving an incorrect surgical site were significantly less likely to result in a defendant outcome, with 7 of 12 cases (58.3%) leading to a plaintiff outcome (P=.047). With more than two-thirds of cases resulting in a defendant verdict, many suits result in a favorable outcome for practitioners. Intraoperative error is the most common reason for litigation, and neurovascular injury resulted in the highest monetary payouts. Vigilance to avoid these events may improve patient outcomes and decrease liability to practitioners. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(1):e47-e52.].

Postoperative pain and infection are the most frequent reasons for legal action after knee arthroscopy: a 5-year review based on two private insurance French companies after arthroscopy

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine the reasons for complaints and describe the judicial means upstream of France's courts following arthroscopy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study including all compensation records related to arthroscopic surgery, collected from the two leading French insurance organizations: MACSF and Branchet companies, from 2014 to 2018. Three medical experts performed the protocol and analysis.

RESULTS

Finally, 247 procedures were included. The most common motives were: the appearance or persistence of pain (43.7%), postoperative infection (29.1%), technical errors (10.5%), nerve damage (5.7%), arterial lesions (2.8%), side errors (2.4%). Knee arthroscopies were more at risk of legal action for infection (p = 0.0006), and for disappointing results or persistent pain (p = 0.001). The first recourse was the conciliation and compensation commission (CCI) in 136 cases (55.1%), the civil court (TGI) in 88 cases (35.6%) and amicable settlement in 23 cases (9.3%). The mean time between surgery and the complaint was 32.8 ± 25.7 months, and was shorter in the case of an amicable procedure (p < 0.001). The lawsuit's mean duration was 15.6 ± 11.2 months, but longer in case of civil proceedings (p < 0.0001). The experts found no negligence in 81.8% of cases (n = 202). Infections were the leading cause of recourse to the conciliation and compensation commission (p < 0.0001), while technical errors were the main reason for complaints settled in an amicable procedure (p = 0.035). It was found more proven negligence in case of amicable procedures (p < 0.0001). The mean amount of compensation was 60,968.45€. No significant difference could be found regarding the median values of compensation between the reason of complaint. The amount of compensation was higher in civil court proceedings than in any others (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The main reasons for arthroscopy litigation in France are reported in this study, specifying how they are managed upstream of possible legal proceedings. The knee is the main joint involved. Patient information, close follow-up associated with early and appropriate management of complications are the main ways to reduce complaints.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Litigation in arthroscopic surgery: a 20-year analysis of legal actions in France

PURPOSE

The main objective of this study was to identify the epidemiological characteristics of litigation following arthroscopic procedures, performed in private practice and public hospitals in France. The secondary objective was to establish a risk profile for medical malpractice lawsuits after arthroscopic surgery.

METHODS

All court decisions related to arthroscopic surgery between 1994 and 2020 were collected and reviewed cases from the two main French legal databases (Legifrance and Doctrine). Data were retrospectively collected and included: gender, joint and defendant's specialty involved, reason behind the lawsuit, initial indication and the type of arthroscopic procedure performed. The final verdicts as well as the indemnity awarded to the plaintiff (if any) were recorded.

RESULTS

One-hundred eighty cases met the inclusion criteria of the study and were analyzed: 58 cases were before administrative courts and 122 were before civil courts. An orthopaedic surgeon was involved alone or in solidum in 45.6% of cases (82/180), followed by anesthesiologists in 5.6% (10/180). The private surgery center or public hospital were implicated in 63.9% (115/180) of cases. The 2 most common joints involved in litigation following arthroscopic surgery were the knee (82.2%, n = 148) and the shoulder (11.1%, n = 20). The main reasons behind the lawsuit were related to postoperative infection in 78/180 cases and to a musculoskeletal complication in 45/180 cases (25%). A failure to inform was also reported in 34/180 cases (18.9%). Of the 180 cases, 122 cases (67.8%) resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff. The average indemnity award for the plaintiff was 77.984 euros [2.282-1.117.667]. A verdict for the plaintiff was significantly associated with postoperative infection or a wrong-side surgery, while technical error and musculoskeletal complications were more significantly likely to result in a verdict in favor of the defendant (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study evaluated and mapped lawsuits following after arthroscopic surgery in France over a period of more than 20 years. The main joint involved in lawsuits was knee. The main causes of lawsuits following arthroscopic surgery were related to postoperative infection, musculoskeletal complications and failure to inform.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

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.

Malpractice claims associated with foot surgery

Surgery of the foot constitutes a substantial portion of orthopedic procedures, performed by both orthopedic surgeons and doctors of podiatric medicine. Little research exists on the medicolegal implications of foot surgery amongst these specialties. This study seeks to investigate the different medical and legal factors associated with foot surgery-based malpractice litigation. Malpractice data between 2004 and 2017 was collected using the VerdictSearch legal database. Cases involving foot surgery were identified, and case information including physician specialty, procedure, medical outcome, verdict, and payment amount were obtained. A total of 72 cases were analyzed. A majority of lawsuits involved podiatrists (76.4%), with orthopedic surgeons accounting for 15.3%. Lawsuits against podiatrists primarily occurred over elective procedures (94.5%) and most frequently involved plaintiff complaints of persistent pain (41.8%) or deformation (27.3%). Podiatrist cases most often involved allegations of failure to treat (45.5%) or inappropriate surgical procedure (27.3%). Orthopedic surgeons saw higher rates of urgent cases (45.5%), with surgical complications (27.3%) occurring at higher rates than podiatrists. Despite different trends in case types, similar rates of plaintiff victories, and mean payments were seen between podiatrists (25.5%, $911,884 ± 1,145,345) and orthopedic surgeons (27.3%, $975,555 ± 448,795). This investigation is the first to analyze malpractice trends amongst podiatrists and orthopedic surgeons. Differing factors related to medical and legal outcomes can suggest quality improvement targets for both specialties. This data may assist in reducing malpractice risk and refining patient care, particularly with regards to outlining risks, benefits, and alternatives during pre-operative counselling.

Malpractice Litigation Following Traumatic Fracture

BACKGROUND

Poor clinical outcomes and adverse events following orthopaedic trauma are common, which may lead to litigation. To our knowledge, factors associated with litigation following fracture care have not previously been evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective review of fracture-related malpractice lawsuits from 1988 to 2015 was completed utilizing VerdictSearch (ALM Media Properties), a medicolegal database. Defendant and plaintiff characteristics along with fracture type, allegations, litigation outcomes, and the association of case characteristics with outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 561 cases were evaluated; 360 cases were excluded, resulting in a total of 201 cases that were analyzed in detail. The mean age of the plaintiff was 43.1 years (standard deviation [SD],19.4 years). Twenty-four fracture types were represented among the analyzed cases. The most common fractures were of the radius (44), the femur (32), the tibia (30), the ulna (29), the humerus (26), the spine (24), the hip (17), and the fibula (15). Overall, 129 (64.2%) cases resulted in a defense verdict, 41 (20.4%) cases resulted in a plaintiff verdict, and 31 (15.4%) cases resulted in a settlement. For plaintiff verdicts, the mean indemnity payment was $3,778,657 (median, $753,057; range, $89,943 to $27,926,311). For settlements, the mean indemnity payment was $1,097,439 (median, $547,935; range, $103,541 to $9,445,113). The mean indemnity for plaintiff verdicts was significantly greater than the mean indemnity for settlements (p = 0.03). The presence of a neurological deficit was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of a favorable outcome for the plaintiff (52.8% for plaintiffs with neurological deficit versus 32.1% for plaintiffs without neurological deficit; p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined malpractice litigation following traumatic orthopaedic injuries. In cases with decisions for the plaintiff, indemnity payments were on average more than $2.5 million larger than payments for settlements. In fracture cases with neurological deficit, malpractice cases were more likely to result in a favorable outcome for the plaintiff.