Literature DB >> 36127545

The impact and prevention of systemic and diagnostic errors in surgical malpractice claims in Japan: a retrospective cohort study.

Jun Watanabe1,2, Norio Yamamoto2,3, Ayako Shibata4, Shiho Oide2,5, Takashi Watari6,7.   

Abstract

The Surgical Patient Safety System (SURPASS) has been proven to improve patient outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated the details of litigation and its prevention in terms of systemic and diagnostic errors as potentially preventable problems. The present study explored factors associated with accepted claims (surgeon-loss). We retrospectively searched the national Japanese malpractice claims database between 1961 and 2017. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we assessed the association between medical malpractice variables (systemic and diagnostic errors, facility size, time, place, and clinical outcomes) and litigation outcomes (acceptance). We evaluated whether or not the factors associated with litigation could have been prevented with the SURPASS checklist. We identified 339 malpractice claims made against general surgeons. There were 159 (56.3%) accepted claims, and the median compensation paid was 164,381 USD. In multivariable analyses, system (odds ratio, 27.2 95% confidence interval 13.8-53.5) and diagnostic errors (odds ratio 5.3, 95% confidence interval 2.7-10.5) had a significant statistical association with accepted claims. The SURPASS checklist may have prevented 7% and 10% of the accepted claims and systemic errors, respectively. It is unclear what proportion of accepted claims indicated that general surgeon loses should be prevented from performing surgery if the SURPASS checklist were used. In conclusion, systemic and diagnostic errors were associated with accepted claims. Surgical teams should adhere to the SURPASS checklist to enhance patient safety and reduce surgeon risk.
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diagnostic error; General surgeons; Medical malpractice claims; Surgical patient safety system; System error

Year:  2022        PMID: 36127545     DOI: 10.1007/s00595-022-02590-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Today        ISSN: 0941-1291            Impact factor:   2.540


  6 in total

1.  [Surgical errors in archives of the forensic medicine department, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, and in Archives of the District Chamber of Physicians in Szczecin].

Authors:  Danuta Deboa
Journal:  Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol       Date:  2007 Apr-Jun

2.  [Medical negligence in surgery: 112 cases retrospective analysis].

Authors:  Jian Xiang; Lin Chang; Xu Wang; Feng-Qin Zhang
Journal:  Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2013-06

3.  Preventable Closed Claims in the AANA Foundation Closed Malpractice Claims Database.

Authors:  Michael J Kremer; Maria Hirsch; Marjorie Geisz-Everson; Bryan A Wilbanks; Beth A Clayton; Rebecca R Boust; Lorraine Jordan
Journal:  AANA J       Date:  2019-12

4.  Malpractice claims related to diagnostic errors in the hospital.

Authors:  Ashwin Gupta; Ashley Snyder; Allen Kachalia; Scott Flanders; Sanjay Saint; Vineet Chopra
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 7.035

5.  Surgical adverse events, risk management, and malpractice outcome: morbidity and mortality review is not enough.

Authors:  John A Morris; Ysela Carrillo; Judith M Jenkins; Philip W Smith; Sandy Bledsoe; James Pichert; Andrew White
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Effect of Comprehensive Surgical Safety System on Patients' Outcome: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Authors:  Nishkarsh Mehta; Anandhi Amaranathan; Loganathan Jayapal; Pankaj Kundra; Vishnu Prasad Nelamangala Ramakrishnaiah
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-05-10
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.