Literature DB >> 30151803

Can spinal surgery in England be saved from litigation: a review of 978 clinical negligence claims against the NHS.

John T Machin1, John Hardman2, William Harrison3, Timothy W R Briggs4, Mike Hutton5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the true incidence of all clinical negligence claims against spinal surgery performed by orthopaedic spinal surgeons and neurosurgeons in the National Health Service (NHS) in England, including both open and closed claims.
METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of 978 clinical negligence claims held by NHS Resolution against spinal surgery cases identified from claims against 'Neurosurgery' and 'Orthopaedic Surgery'. This category included all emergency, trauma and elective work and all open and closed cases without exclusion between April 2012 and April 2017.
RESULTS: Clinical negligence claims in spinal surgery were estimated to cost £535.5 million over this five-year period. There is a trend of both increasing volume and estimated costs of claims. The most common causes for claims were 'judgement/timing' (512 claims, 52.35%), 'interpretation of results/clinical picture' (255 claims, 26.07%), 'unsatisfactory outcome to surgery' (192 claims, 19.63%), 'fail to warn/informed consent' (80 claims, 8.13%) and 'never events' including 'wrong site surgery' or 'retained instrument post-operation' (26 claims, 2.66%). A sub-analysis of 3 years including 574 claims revealed the most prevalent pathologies were iatrogenic nerve damage (132 claims, 23.00%), cauda equina syndrome (CES) (131 claims, 22.82%), inadequate decompression (91 claims, 15.85%), iatrogenic cord damage (72 claims, 12.54%), and infection (51 claims, 8.89%).
CONCLUSIONS: The volume and costs of clinical negligence claims is threatening the future of spinal surgery. If spinal surgery is to continue to serve the patients who need it, most thorough investigation, implementation and sharing of lessons learned from litigation claims must be systematically carried out. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Litigation; Malpractice; Medicolegal; Negligence

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30151803     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-018-5739-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  5 in total

1.  Malpractice litigation and the spine: the NHS perspective on 235 successful claims in England.

Authors:  N A Quraishi; T C Hammett; D B Todd; M A Bhutta; V Kapoor
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  British Association of Spine Surgeons standards of care for cauda equina syndrome.

Authors:  Timothy Germon; Sashin Ahuja; Adrian T H Casey; Nicholas V Todd; Am Rai
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  MDU ceases to cover private spinal surgery.

Authors:  Nigel Hawkes
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-06-05

4.  Does physician performance explain interspecialty differences in malpractice claim rates?

Authors:  M I Taragin; F A Sonnenberg; M E Karns; R Trout; S Shapiro; J L Carson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  The 'three-legged stool': a system for spinal informed consent.

Authors:  J M Powell; A Rai; M Foy; A Casey; H Dabke; A Gibson; M Hutton
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 5.082

  5 in total
  5 in total

1.  Compliance With the Cauda Equina Pathway: Results of a Closed-Loop Audit.

Authors:  Emmanuel Ago; Ghulam Dastagir Faisal Mohammed; Saad Maqsood; Momin Mohaddis; Prakash Chandran
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-12-31

2.  Clinical negligence costs: taking action to safeguard NHS sustainability.

Authors:  Christopher Wai Hung Yau; Bertie Leigh; Elisa Liberati; Daniel Punch; Mary Dixon-Woods; Tim Draycott
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2020-03-02

3.  Claims in orthopedic foot/ankle surgery, how can they help to improve quality of care? A retrospective claim analysis.

Authors:  Fay R K Sanders; Patricia Wimmer-Boelhouwers; Onno X Dijt; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs; Tim Schepers
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2020-07-26

4.  Analysis of medical malpractice litigation following vertebral augmentation therapy in China from 2008 to 2018.

Authors:  Dong Hu; Huawei Liu; Bei Yuan; Suxi Gu; Kai Xu; Fei Song; Songhua Xiao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-10-14       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 5.  A perspective on wrong level, wrong side, and wrong site spine surgery.

Authors:  Nancy Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-06-14
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.