Literature DB >> 26492906

Litigation costs of wrong-site surgery and other non-technical errors in orthopaedic operating theatres.

W D Harrison1, B Narayan1, A W Newton1, J V Banks1, G Cheung1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study reviews the litigation costs of avoidable errors in orthopaedic operating theatres (OOTs) in England and Wales from 1995 to 2010 using the National Health Service Litigation Authority Database.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Litigation specifically against non-technical errors (NTEs) in OOTs and issues regarding obtaining adequate consent was identified and analysed for the year of incident, compensation fee, cost of legal defence, and likelihood of compensation.
RESULTS: There were 550 claims relating to consent and NTEs in OOTs. Negligence was related to consent (n=126), wrong-site surgery (104), injuries in the OOT (54), foreign body left in situ (54), diathermy and skin-preparation burns (54), operator error (40), incorrect equipment (25), medication errors (15) and tourniquet injuries (10). Mean cost per claim was £40,322. Cumulative cost for all cases was £20 million. Wrong-site surgery was error that elicited the most successful litigation (89% of cases). Litigation relating to implantation of an incorrect prosthesis (eg right-sided prosthesis in a left knee) cost £2.9 million. Prevalence of litigation against NTEs has declined since 2007.
CONCLUSIONS: Improved patient-safety strategies such as the World Health Organization Surgical Checklist may be responsible for the recent reduction in prevalence of litigation for NTEs. However, addition of a specific feature in orthopaedic surgery, an 'implant time-out' could translate into a cost benefit for National Health Service hospital trusts and improve patient safety.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Consent; Wrong-site surgery; Litigation; Negligence; Orthopaedic; Patient safety

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26492906      PMCID: PMC5096619          DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2015.0045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  20 in total

Review 1.  An analysis of orthopaedic liability in the acute care setting.

Authors:  Mark T Gould; Michael J Langworthy; Richard Santore; Matthew T Provencher
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  The prevalence of wrong level surgery among spine surgeons.

Authors:  Milan G Mody; Ali Nourbakhsh; Daniel L Stahl; Mark Gibbs; Mohammad Alfawareh; Kim J Garges
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals.

Authors:  Atul A Gawande; Michael J Zinner; David M Studdert; Troyen A Brennan
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Professional liability in orthopaedics and traumatology in Italy.

Authors:  Umberto Tarantino; Alessio Giai Via; Ernesto Macrì; Alessandro Eramo; Valeria Marino; Luigi Tonino Marsella
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Medico-legal claims following amputations in the UK and Ireland.

Authors:  Victoria R Scurr; James R H Scurr; John H Scurr
Journal:  Med Leg J       Date:  2012

6.  Lessons regarding the safety of orthopaedic patient care: an analysis of four hundred and sixty-four closed malpractice claims.

Authors:  Frederick A Matsen; Linda Stephens; Jocelyn L Jette; Winston J Warme; Karen L Posner
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  'Skating on thin ice?' Consultant surgeon's contemporary experience of adverse surgical events.

Authors:  Suzanne M Skevington; Joanne E Langdon; Grey Giddins
Journal:  Psychol Health Med       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.423

8.  Litigation after hip and knee replacement in the National Health Service.

Authors:  A B McWilliams; S L Douglas; A C Redmond; A J Grainger; P J O'Connor; T D Stewart; M H Stone
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.082

9.  Can the surgical checklist reduce the risk of wrong site surgery in orthopaedics?--Can the checklist help? Supporting evidence from analysis of a national patient incident reporting system.

Authors:  Sukhmeet S Panesar; Douglas J Noble; Saqeb B Mirza; Bhavesh Patel; Bhupinder Mann; Mark Emerton; Kevin Cleary; Aziz Sheikh; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 10.  Retained surgical sponges, needles and instruments.

Authors:  D Hariharan; D N Lobo
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.891

View more
  4 in total

1.  Assessing the quality of consent in elective hip and knee arthroplasty: Do modern orthopaedic surgeons make the cut?

Authors:  Joseph Heylen; Vaki Antoniou; Jayson Roberts; Oliver Kemp; James Morris; Amit Vats
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-09-22

2.  Alleged malpractice in orthopaedics. Analysis of a series of medmal insurance claims.

Authors:  M B Casali; A Blandino; S Del Sordo; G Vignali; S Novello; G Travaini; M Berlusconi; U Genovese
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2018-07-27

3.  Analysis and outcomes of wrong site thyroid surgery.

Authors:  Gianlorenzo Dionigi; Marco Raffaelli; Rocco Bellantone; Carmela De Crea; Carlo Enrico Ambrosini; Paolo Miccoli; Gabriele Materazzi; Antonio Ieni; Ettore Caruso; Daqi Zhang; Henning Dralle
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  The Consent Process for Elective Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: Does Information on Handwritten Forms Meet Prescribed Standards?

Authors:  Anirudh Sharma; Osasumwen Adelowo; Santosh Bindumadhavan; Naufal Ahmed; Amir-Reza Jenabzadeh
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-03-28
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.