Search

In the German Ordinance on Occupational Diseases (BKV), there are currently 82 occupational diseases listed, of which 18 partially or completely fall within the field of ENT medicine due to the associated health disorders. Noise-induced hearing loss is usually the focus of attention for the ENT specialist, but it has long since ceased to be the only occupational disease. In order to help uncover possible causalities between occupational noxious substances and diseases, it is important that physicians report their own observations and new scientific findings regarding suspected cases to the German Social Accident Insurance, especially in situations where cancer may be linked to occupational influences., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Working during pregnancy and breastfeeding is a special situation for both the employee and the employer/supervisor. The amended version of the Maternity Protection Act (MuSchG), which came into force on January 1st, 2018, protects the health of women and their children while working, training or studying during pregnancy, after giving birth and while breastfeeding. Women should be able to continue their employment or related activities during this time without jeopardising their health or that of their child. This law was furthermore reformed to prevent discrimination against the working mother during this time. In order to create the best and safest possible framework conditions for employment during pregnancy and breastfeeding, the DGHNO-KHC and the BVHNO would like to present a "general positive list" and a "positive list for surgical activities" as part of this statement, which should serve as a guideline for all relevant parties. This agreed positive list is intended to enable pregnant and breastfeeding doctors to carry out patient-related activities as well as head and neck surgeries in accordance with the MuSchG of 2018. Hereby, affected colleagues should have the opportunity to continue working self-determined., Competing Interests: Frau Dr. Sharma gibt an: Advisory Board Merck Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Importance: It is important to recognize factors that may mitigate the risk of a potential lawsuit and increase knowledge and awareness of physicians. Objective: To evaluate and characterize facial nerve paralysis litigation claims and related potential causes. Design, Setting, and Participants: These data were extracted from the two main computerized legal databases: WestLaw and LexisNexis. The data were queried on April 2, 2020. The records from 1919 to 2020 were obtained from a population-based setting. A total of 186 cases were included. Data were gathered for all alleged cases of facial nerve paralysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: There was a continuous rise in the amount of malpractice payments with the highest mean amount being in the past decade. Results: From 1919 to 2020, a total of 186 malpractice cases for facial nerve damage were identified. A total amount of $89,178,857.99 was rewarded to plaintiffs in 66 cases. The mean amount of paid malpractice claim was $1,351,194.80. Improper performance/treatment was the most common reason for alleged litigation ( n  = 97). This was followed by misdiagnosis/delayed diagnosis ( n  = 47), and failure of informed consent ( n  = 34). The highest number of malpractice claims with a total of 53 cases was from 1991 to 2000. The highest mean amount per payment was in the past decade (2011-2020) with a mean of $3,841,052.68. Conclusions and Relevance: Over the past century, improper performance/procedure, delayed/misdiagnosis, and failure of informed consent were the most common reasons for litigations related to facial nerve paralysis.

Generally, COVID-19 is an acute contagious disease caused by the SARS‑CoV-2 virus. The main route of human-to-human transmission is through contact with infectious secretions from the respiratory tract. Clinical manifestations vary from mild non-specific symptoms to life-threatening conditions. Since WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic in March 2020, it has affected many medical, legal, social and economic aspects of everyday life in countries around the world. In this article, the authors present a summary of recommendations for taking care of otorhinolaryngology patients in outpatient settings and the legal basis referring to a risk of infection in doctor's office. In the selection of articles, the authors used English- and Polish-language online medical databases, typing the following keywords: SARS‑CoV-2, COVID-19, otolaryngology, endoscopy, personal protective equipment, and legal responsibility of the physician. The mucosa of the upper respiratory tract is a potential site of virus replication. The specificity of an ear, nose and throat (ENT) examination and a direct patient-doctor contact favor the transmission of the infection. The authors discussed the elements of self-protection of medical personnel and the legal aspects a risk of the patient contracting the infection in the otolaryngology office. In the case of a direct contact with the patient, the following medical personal protective equipment is required: a cap, a mask with an FFP-2 filter, goggles, an apron and gloves. If, during the visit, exposure to secretions or aerosol from the respiratory tract is expected, the personnel should additionally wear a visor and a waterproof apron. The patient's visit in the clinic should be preceded by telemedicine consultation. Patients should be screened prior to having a direct contact with a physician, using a short patient questionnaire. The questionnaire may consist of simple questions about the characteristic symptoms of the SARS‑CoV-2 infection and exposure to a sick person in the past 14 days. The question of staying in the areas of a high infection risk appears of little importance in view of the whole of Poland being perceived as constituting such an area. Due to the spread of the SARS‑CoV-2 virus, new procedures for providing medical services have been introduced. In the case of claims on the part of the patient, the only protection the medical personnel or facility can provide is confirmation of scrupulous compliance with medical procedures . Med Pr. 2021;72(3):327-34., (This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.)

Background: Litigation in the National Health Service continues to rise with a 9.4 per cent increase in clinical negligence claims from the period 2018 and 2019 to the period 2019 and 2020. The cost of these claims now accounts for 1.8 per cent of the National Health Service 2019 to 2020 budget. This study aimed to identify the characteristics of clinical negligence claims in the subspecialty of otology., Methods: This study was a retrospective review of all clinical negligence claims in otology in England held by National Health Service Resolution between April 2013 and April 2018., Results: There were 171 claims in otology, 24 per cent of all otolaryngology claims, with a potential cost of £24.5 million. Over half of these were associated with hearing loss. Stapedectomy was the highest mean cost per claim operation at £769 438. The most common reasons for litigation were failure or delay in treatment (23 per cent), failure or delay in diagnosis (20 per cent), intra-operative complications (15 per cent) and inadequate consent (13 per cent)., Conclusion: There is a risk of high-cost claims in otology, especially with objective injuries such as hearing loss and facial nerve injury.

Objectives/hypothesis: To report key characteristics of the landscape of malpractice litigation with associated court proceedings in otolaryngology over the previous decade., Study Design: Retrospective database review., Methods: The LexisNexis database was queried to identify otolaryngology-related malpractices cases that yielded court opinions, jury verdicts, and settlements from federal and state courts across the United States from 2010 to 2019. Cases settled outside of court were not identifiable. Provider subspecialty, procedures, error type, legal allegations, and case outcomes were recorded. Frequency of error type was compared between otolaryngology subspecialties using Fisher exact tests., Results: Ninety-four medical malpractice cases related to otolaryngology with evidence of court proceedings were identified for the period between 2010 and 2019. An otolaryngologist was named as the sole defendant in 39 cases (41%). Rhinology was the most frequently implicated subspecialty (28% of all cases), followed by head and neck surgery (17%) and facial plastics (7%). Improper surgical performance was cited in nearly half of the identified cases (49%), followed by failure to diagnose/refer/treat (32%). Outcome and liability data were available for 56 cases (60%). Of these 56 cases, 50 (89%) were ruled in favor of the defendant otolaryngologist. Of the cases ruled in favor of the plaintiff, the average indemnity was $4.24 M (range, $150,000 M-$10.25 M). Fisher exact tests demonstrated statistically significant differences in consent issues (P = .040), failure to diagnose/refer/treat (P = .024), and improper surgical performance (P = .026) between subspecialties., Conclusions: In a limited, database-derived sample of medical malpractice cases involving otolaryngologists, trends in error type by subspecialty may warrant further investigation to identify specialty-wide and subspecialty-specific areas of practice improvement and education., Level of Evidence: N/A Laryngoscope, 131:E1081-E1085, 2021., (© 2020 American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society Inc, "The Triological Society" and American Laryngological Association (ALA).)

Introduction: Litigation in healthcare is a large financial burden to the NHS and can be a cause of great stress to clinicians. The overall number of claims across specialities, from the years 1995-2017 have increased. Despite being one of the smaller surgical specialities, litigation costs are still significant within Otolaryngology. In this piece we sought to analyse the available data to identify trends within litigation and therefore which areas of practise could be improved., Methods: A freedom of information request was submitted to NHS Resolution for summarised data on claims coded under 'Otolaryngology' or 'ENT' between 1996 and 2017. Information was collected on the total number of claims, the number of successful claims and details on the reasons for making claims., Results: The total number of claims made against Otolaryngology departments from 1996/97 to 2016/17 was 1952. The overall number of claims have increased during this time period. The total amount of money paid out between 1996 and 2017 was £108, 240, 323. The top causes of claim by injury were unnecessary pain and unnecessary operations. The highest number of claims by cause were for failure or delay in diagnosis and intraoperative problems., Conclusion: These results highlight areas that local units can focus on to reduce their litigation burden. Targeted initiatives aimed at improving patient-clinician communication, the consent process and improving local organisational efficiency will address a significant proportion of claims. Re-examination of this data on a regular basis can serve as a useful adjunct in assessing the impact of quality improvement initiatives and implementation of best practiseswithin the speciality., (Copyright © 2019 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Malpractice litigation remains an important point of contention in the United States. Airway management often sees multidisciplinary teams of anesthesiologists and otolaryngologists. This report analyzes lawsuits affecting both teams in airway management., Methods: The Westlaw legal database (West Publishing Co., St. Paul, MN) was used to search for malpractice cases involving failed airway management, where both anesthesiology and otolaryngology were involved., Results: Among the 28 cases analyzed, otolaryngology and anesthesiology were most commonly sued together (46.4%). When sued together, defendants were less likely to win and average award amounts ($4, 558 716) were higher. These cases most commonly occurred in the operating room (78.6%), involved a difficult/improper intubation (39.3%), alleged a failure to follow standard of care (57%), and resulted in death (60.7%)., Conclusion: These cases primarily cited failure to follow standard of care and communication failures. Efforts should be directed toward multidisciplinary airway management protocols and effective communication., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Given their profound emotional, physical, and financial toll on patients and surgeons, we studied the characteristics, costs, and contributing factors of thyroid and parathyroid surgical malpractice claims., Methods: Using the Controlled Risk Insurance Company Strategies' Comparative Benchmarking System database, representing ~30% of all US paid and unpaid malpractice claims, 5384 claims filed against general surgeons and otolaryngologists from 1995-2015 were reviewed to isolate claims involving the surgical management of thyroid and parathyroid disease. These claims were studied, and multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with plaintiff payout., Results: One hundred twenty-eight thyroid and parathyroid surgical malpractice claims were isolated. The median time from alleged harm event to closure of a malpractice case was 39 months. The most common associated complications were bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury (n = 23) and hematoma (n = 18). Complications led to death in 18 cases. Patient payout occurred in 33% of claims (n = 42), and the median cost per claim was $277,913 (IQR $87,343-$783,663). On multivariable analysis, bilateral RLN injury was predictive of patient payout (OR 3.58, p = 0.03), while procedure, death, and surgeon specialty were not., Conclusion: Though rare, malpractice claims related to thyroid and parathyroid surgery are costly, time-consuming, and reveal opportunities for early surgeon-patient resolution after poor outcomes.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the malpractice litigations pertaining to otorhinolaryngology in Japan., Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of cases tried in the Japanese civil court system during the 26-year period from 1990 to 2015 as identified in a computerized legal database. Data including patient demographics, disease, chief allegations, court's decisions, and the year decision was made were collected and analyzed. Patients' chief allegations were assigned to one of the five categories: delayed diagnosis, complication during diagnostic procedure, inappropriate treatment, complication during treatment procedure, or lack of informed consent., Results: Thirty-one malpractice litigations were identified. Eight (26%) malpractice litigations pertained to tumors, 1 (3%) to a tumor-like lesion, 14 (45%) to inflammation, and 8 (26%) to others. Among the patients' chief allegations, inappropriate treatment and complication during treatment procedure were the most frequent [11 (36%) for each], followed by delayed diagnosis [6 (19%)], complication during diagnostic procedure [2 (6%)], and lack of informed consent [1 (3%)]., Conclusion: These data may aid in the design of risk-prevention strategies to be used by otorhinolaryngologists.

NHS Resolution provides indemnity cover for legal claims against the NHS, assists the NHS with risk management and aims to share lessons from claims in order to improve safety. The study aimed to investigate the financial costs of litigation against English Health Trusts in otolaryngology over a 10-year period, to see if any lessons have been learned and identify trends that may lead to a potential reduction in costs and improve patient safety. A Freedom of Information request was made to NHS Resolution for information regarding claims made to otolaryngology departments over the last 10 years. There was a total of 612 successful claims in the 10-year period between 2008/2009 and 2017/2018 with costs of nearly £87 million. Overall, the costs of litigation have increased dramatically, and the main areas for these successful claims can be identified, but restrictions in the detail of information released allows too little insight for improvements to be made to avoid them in future. This continues to be a major problem for healthcare funding and practice.

Summary: In current healthcare, delivery of medical and surgical treatment takes place in a multidisciplinary manner. This raises the problem of distinguishing the conditions under which the person who has properly carried out his duties, respecting the related leges artis, can be held responsible for damages materially caused by another member of the medical team. Jurisprudence has developed the so-called "principle of trust" for which every member of the team can rely on the fact that other members are acting in compliance with the leges artis of their specialisation. The Supreme Court has limited the application of this principle. The authors examine the jurisprudence on responsibility of the team in otolaryngology and conclude that individual liability should be limited to the specific expertise of the individual specialist., (Copyright © 2018 Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Only about ten articles devoted to operative reports have been published in the medical literature, but this document is essential, both medically and legally, to ensure optimal management of operated patients. In this technical note, based on published studies on this subject, the authors describe the key features of operating reports after otorhinolaryngology head & neck surgery and emphasize the need to write this document during the minutes after the end of the operation, the importance of standardization and its teaching role during surgical training., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives/hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors raised in malpractice litigation related to the diagnosis and management of melanoma and to further assess issues impacting outcome., Study Design: Retrospective chart review., Methods: The Westlaw legal database was searched for malpractice litigation resolved over the last 20 years relating to melanoma. Cases were evaluated for allegations, defendant specialty, outcome, and other issues raised., Results: Of the 80 cases evaluated, 49% were resolved in the defendants' favor. In greater than 80% of cases, there was alleged misdiagnosis. In 35% of cases, the patient had expired secondary to melanoma at the time of litigation. There was no statistical difference in payments upon comparison of cases with and without mortality. A greater proportion of cases with dermatologists and pathologists as defendants involved alleged misdiagnosis. The most common locations for melanoma were the extremities and the head-and-neck region, at 32.5% and 22.5%, respectively. Location did not significantly impact the outcome of cases., Conclusion: Malpractice litigation relating to melanoma involves numerous physicians, including dermatologists, pathologists, and otolaryngologists. Alleged misdiagnosis of a pigmented lesion was the most common cause of litigation and involved physicians from numerous specialties. Patients who were misdiagnosed had a significantly higher likelihood of having active disease at the time of litigation. Ultimately improved methods of detecting concerning pigmented lesions need to be developed. Factors such as death and poor cosmetic outcome did not significantly impact litigation outcome., Level of Evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 127:134-139, 2017., (© 2016 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objectives/hypothesis: Malpractice claims pertaining to laryngology procedures are a potentially important source of information that could be used to minimize the risk of future litigation and improve patient care., Study Design: A retrospective review of two publicly available databases containing jury verdicts and settlements., Methods: The LexisNexis Jury Verdicts and Settlements and WestlawNext legal databases were reviewed for all lawsuits and out-of-court adjudications related to the practice of laryngology. Data including patient demographics, type of surgery performed, plaintiff allegation, nature of injury, outcomes, and indemnities were collected and analyzed., Results: Of 87 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 56 were decided by a jury and 31 were adjudicated out of court. Vocal cord surgery was the most commonly litigated surgery. The two most commonly cited legal allegations were physical injury and negligence. No statistical difference for legal outcome was found when death or vocal cord injuries occurred. Complications in procedures that utilized a laser predicted an unfavorable outcome (P = 0.013). A payout was made in over one-half of cases, but defendants were favored in over two-thirds of cases decided by a jury. The average indemnities were significant for both jury verdicts ($4.6 million) and out-of-court settlements ($0.9 million)., Conclusion: An awareness of laryngology malpractice litigation has the potential to provide better patient care and help laryngologists avoid potential risks for litigation. The factors determining legal responsibility in laryngology cases underscore the importance of close communication with anesthesiologists and careful evaluation of hoarseness in all patients regardless of risk factors., Level of Evidence: N/A. Laryngoscope, 126:2301-2304, 2016., (© 2016 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objective: To investigate rhinology-related malpractice claims with the aim of optimising safe practice., Methods: The database of the National Institute of Forensic Medicine was reviewed. In total, 241 otorhinolaryngology malpractice case reports dating from 2005 to 2012 were evaluated, and 83 malpractice cases related to rhinology treatments were separated., Results: There was no significant difference between the number of male (n = 42) and female (n = 41) claimants. The mean patient age was 32.07 ± 10.53 years (range, 10-75 years). Seventy-nine cases involved surgical treatment in rhinology. The most common complaints were: unsatisfactory cosmetic results (n = 30), optic nerve injury (n = 10), septal perforation (n = 9) and intracranial penetration (n = 4). Malpractice was detected in 21 cases (25.3 per cent). No delinquency was found in 62 cases (74.7 per cent)., Conclusion: Physicians should be aware of legal consequences related to rhinology practice. Further study is needed on this topic, as well as interdisciplinary collaboration, to ensure best practices and to avoid litigation.

Objectives/hypothesis: Malpractice claims pertaining to rhinological procedures are a potentially important source of information that could be used to minimize the risk of future litigation and improve patient care., Study Design: A retrospective review of a publicly available database containing jury verdicts and settlements., Methods: The LexisNexis Jury Verdicts and Settlements database was reviewed for all lawsuits and out-of-court adjudications related to the practice of rhinology. Data including patient demographics, type of surgery performed, plaintiff allegation, nature of injury, outcomes, and indemnities were collected and analyzed., Results: Of 85 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 42 were decided by a jury and 43 were adjudicated out of court. Endoscopic sinus surgery was the most commonly litigated surgery. The plaintiff was favored when the eye was injured (P = 0.0196), but the defendant was favored when neuropsychological injuries (P = 0.0137) or recurrent/worsened symptoms (P = 0.0050) were cited. No difference was found when death or skull base injuries occurred. When lack of informed consent was an allegation, the defendant was favored (P = 0.0001). A payout was made in two-thirds of cases overall, but the defendant was favored in two-thirds of cases decided by a jury. Payments were significant for both out-of-court settlements ($1.3 million) and jury verdicts ($2 million)., Conclusions: Endoscopic sinus surgery remains the most commonly litigated rhinology procedure and has the potential to result in large payouts. Meticulous dissection, recognition of complications, and documentation of informed consent remain paramount for providing optimal patient care., (© 2015 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Background: Litigation in surgery is increasing and liabilities are becoming unsustainable. This study aimed to analyse trends in claims, and identify areas for potential risk reduction, improved patient safety and a reduction in the number, and cost, of future claims., Methods: Ten years of retrospective data on claims in otorhinolaryngology (2003-2013) were obtained from the National Health Service Litigation Authority via a Freedom of Information request. Data were re-entered into a spreadsheet and coded for analysis., Results: A total of 1031 claims were identified; of these, 604 were successful and 427 were unsuccessful. Successful claims cost a total of £41 000 000 (mean, £68 000). The most common areas for successful claims were: failure or delay in diagnosis (137 cases), intra-operative problems (116 cases), failure or delay in treatment (66 cases), failure to warn - informed consent issue (54 cases), and inappropriate treatment (47 cases)., Conclusion: Over half of the claims in ENT relate to the five most common areas of liability. Recent policy changes by the National Health Service Litigation Authority, over the level of information divulged, limits our learning from claims.

Purpose of Review: Most surgeons at some point are involved in a medical malpractice case. There has been an increase in the number of manuscripts that analyse malpractice databases and insurance claims, as well as commentaries on the current medicolegal climate recently. This manuscript broadly reviews articles of interest to all providers and then focuses on malpractice in otology., Recent Findings: Medical malpractice articles (particularly topics related to otologic surgery published within the last 1-2 years) were searched. The growing body of literature can be divided into the themes of general negligence, mitigating injuries and the use of clinical practice guidelines in the courtroom as guidance for expert witnesses., Summary: Recent findings suggest that the frequency of malpractice claims may be decreasing. Hearing loss and facial nerve injury are the most common injuries associated with otologic surgery. These injuries can be costly when negligence is found. Clinic practice guidelines are slowly being used as evidence in the courtroom and there are established guidelines that an expert witness must follow should a surgeon be called to give testimony.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate factors contributing to medical negligence relevant to craniofacial surgery., Methods: Retrospective analysis of verdict and settlement reports on the Westlaw legal database for outcome, awards, physician defendants, and other specific factors raised in malpractice litigation., Results: Of 42 verdicts and settlement reports included, 52.4% were resolved with either an out-of-court settlement or plaintiff verdict, with aggregate payments totaling $50.1M (in 2013 dollars). Median settlements and jury-awarded damages were $988,000 and $555,000, respectively. Payments in pediatric cases ($1.2M) were significantly higher. Plastic surgeons, oral surgeons, and otolaryngologists were the most commonly named defendants. The most common alleged factors included intraoperative negligence (69.0%), permanent deficits (54.8%), requiring additional surgery (52.4%), missed/delayed diagnosis of a complication (42.9%), disfigurement/scarring (28.6%), postoperative negligence (28.6%), and inadequate informed consent (20.6% of surgical cases). Failure to diagnose a fracture (19.0%) and cleft-reparative procedures (14.3%) were the most frequently litigated entities., Conclusion: Medical negligence related to craniofacial surgery involves plaintiffs in a wide age range as well as physician defendants in numerous specialties, and proceedings resolved with settlement and plaintiff verdict involve substantial payments. Cases with death, allegedly permanent injuries, and pediatric plaintiffs had significantly higher payments., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Objective: Sinonasal disease is a common condition treated by otolaryngologists. Malpractice in this area is the most common litigation faced by otolaryngologists. This study analyzes malpractice in the treatment of sinonasal disease., Study Design: Case series, review of legal records., Setting: Legal databases., Subjects and Methods: Using 2 different computerized legal databases, the phrase medical malpractice was searched with terms related to sinonasal disease involving court cases in the past 10 years (2004-2013), yielding 26 cases. The cases were analyzed for pertinent data regarding plaintiffs, presenting complaint, practice setting, type of malpractice, resulting injury, result of verdict, and amount of reward or settlement., Results: Chronic sinusitis (42%) was the most common presenting symptom. Many cases included multiple types of alleged malpractice, with the most common being negligent technique (38%) and lack of informed consent (27%). The most common alleged injuries included cerebrospinal fluid leak, meningitis, nasal obstruction, and orbital trauma. Defendants prevailed in 13 of 18 cases in which outcomes were known, with mean award of $225,000 and mean settlement of $212,500. The cases won by plaintiffs were all in a private practice setting., Conclusion: Otolaryngologists should be aware of the causes of malpractice litigation as it relates to treatment of sinonasal disease. Lack of informed consent continues to be a common allegation, and surgeons should ensure complete informed consent is obtained and well documented. A unified and complete database of medical malpractice cases is needed to allow for further analysis of specialty-related claims., (© American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2015.)

Objective: Litigation is a rising financial burden on the National Health Service. This study aims to show if litigation is increasing in rhinology and which procedures lead to the most claims., Methods: Ten years of data were obtained from the National Health Service Litigation Authority. Rhinology claims were examined for cost, injury, diagnosis and operation type., Results: Of the 123 rhinology claims identified, 52 per cent were successful. There was a 56 per cent increase in the average annual number of claims between the first half of the study period and the second (p = 0.0451). The commonest reasons for a claim were poor cosmesis (15.6 per cent) and lack of informed consent (14 per cent)., Conclusion: The number of claims in rhinology increased over the study period. Most claims resulted from poor cosmetic outcome, lack of consent or recognised complications. It is suggested that enhanced communication and management of patient expectations could reduce litigation and improve patient satisfaction.

Background: Antibiotics are commonly used in the management of both acute rhinosinusitis and acute exacerbations of chronic rhinosinusitis. With their common use, they have become the leading medication for litigation. It is crucial for the provider to be familiar with potential complications and the medico-legal ramifications of their use. The objectives of this review were to outline the existing data of the medico-legal implications of prescribing oral antibiotics., Methods: An OVID search of the following terms was performed: antibiotics or antibacterial agents AND medico-legal, malpractice, jurisprudence, or informed consent. This search was then narrowed to English language articles and the titles and abstracts were searched for relevance., Results: An OVID search identified 272 articles. This search was then narrowed, resulting in 13 articles that were relevant and included in the current review. Five articles involved database reviews of litigation associated with medications. Antibiotics were the most common medication associated with litigation. Allergic reaction was the single most common reason for litigation., Conclusion: Lawsuits associated with medications are disproportionately costly and antibiotics are the most common type of medication to result in litigation. Although the use of electronic medical records (EMRs) may decrease the frequency of these lawsuits, it is up to the physician to be familiar with the agents prescribed, their risks, and be vigilant regarding possible reactions., (© 2014 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)

Background: This study was designed to determine the characteristics of medical negligence claims in rhinology. In 2010-2011 the National Health Service (NHS) litigation bill surpassed 1 billion Great British Pounds (GBP; 1.52 billion U.S. dollars [US$]). Systematic analysis of malpractice complaints allows for the identification of errors and can thereby improve patient safety and reduce the burden of litigation claims on health services., Methods: Claims relating to ear, nose, and throat between 1995 and 2010 were obtained from the NHS Litigation Authority and were analyzed., Results: The series contains 65 closed claims that resulted in payment totaling 3.1 million GBP (US$4.7 million). Fifty claims were related to surgical complications. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery and septoplasty were the procedures most commonly associated with successful claims. There were 11 cases of orbital injury including 6 cases of visual loss and 5 cases of diplopia. The most common cause of a claim was failure to recognize the complication or manage it appropriately. Lack of informed consent was claimed in eight cases. Other claims arose because of errors in outpatient procedures (two), diagnosis (six), delayed surgery (one), and errors in medical management (three)., Conclusion: This is the first study to report the outcomes of negligence claims in rhinology in the United Kingdom. Claims in rhinology are associated with a high success rate. Steps that can be taken to reduce litigation include careful patient workup and ensuring adequate informed consent. Where there is a suspicion of orbital damage early recognition and intervention is needed to reduce long-term injury to the patient.

Objectives/hypothesis: To identify allegations raised in litigation stemming from pediatric otolaryngologic procedures and conditions., Study Design: Retrospective analysis of a legal database., Methods: The authors reviewed jury verdict and settlement reports on the WestlawNext database from 1994 to 2013 for cases involving pediatric plaintiffs and alleged negligence in otolaryngologic procedures and conditions., Results: Of the 78 cases included, 52.6% were resolved with a payment; aggregate payments exceeded $69 million, and median jury-awarded damages and settlements were $874,190 and $250,000, respectively. Adenotonsillectomy was the most commonly litigated procedure. Otolaryngologists were defendants in 42 (53.8%) cases, with pediatricians and anesthesiologists the next most commonly named defendants. Forty-six (59.0%) cases involved alleged negligence in operative management, whereas other factors included permanent injury (44.9%), misdiagnosis/failure to diagnose in a timely manner (41.0%), death (35.9%), and requiring additional surgery. Airway-related complications and allegedly permanent injuries significantly increased the size of payments. Awards were highest in cases with plaintiffs at 1 to 5-years of age and lowest among children older than 10 years of age., Conclusions: Unique considerations specific to pediatric patients are involved in malpractice litigation, and damages awarded were considerable. By including the specific factors listed in this analysis in a comprehensive informed consent process, and recognizing concerns specific to this patient population, practitioners in multiple specialties may potentially reduce liability. Clear communication with parents is a critical component of this process., (© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Alongside evidence-based medicine, quality assurance has becoming increasingly important in daily medical practice during the last decade. The introduction of a specific quality assurance questionnaire in connection with hearing aid fitting represents the first large-scale assessment of certain elements of patient satisfaction within Germany's public healthcare system. Part 1 of this review describes the most important new regulations pertaining to hearing aid fitting in the context of statutory health insurance. Since the vast majority of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures constituting the treatment of hearing loss patients--particularly the subsequent rehabilitation of hearing aid wearers in cooperation with hearing aid acousticians--occur outside the clinic, this review concentrates on the rules relevant to this area. After studying this part of the overview, readers should be able to understand and apply the sections of the statutory health insurance reimbursement guidelines relating to ambulant hearing aid fitting; furthermore, they should be able to understand and apply the standard evaluation criteria (Einheitlicher Bewertungsmaßstab, EBM).

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review of risks and medico-legal aspects of endoscopic sinus surgery. The development of sophisticated technologies and instruments for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) has caused a dramatic increase in the number of otolaryngologists performing sinus surgery and the number of cases performed. This expansion was accompanied by an increase in malpractice lawsuits. Over the past 20 years, rhinology claims represented 70 % of the total indemnity compensation for otolaryngology claims and ESS was the surgical procedure most often involved. Only then will a careful analysis and assessment of the possible and potential risk factors of ESS, which may mislead the surgeon, allow a correct clinical risk management, with activities and procedures aimed at reducing the possibility of complications that may expose the physician to a malpractice suit.

Importance: Although some have noted that malpractice litigation may be "plateauing," defensive medical practices are pervasive and make up a considerable proportion of the "indirect" costs medicolegal issues contribute toward our health care system. Accordingly, these trends have spurred considerable interest in characterizing factors that play a role in alleged medical negligence, along with outcomes and awards., Objectives: To conduct a focused examination of malpractice litigation regarding laser procedures in the head and neck and to determine the reasons for initiating litigation as well as outcomes and awards., Design and Setting: Retrospective analysis of the WestlawNext legal database, encompassing publicly available federal and state court records, to identify malpractice cases involving laser procedures in the head and neck., Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes, awards, defendant specialty, and other allegations., Results: Most cases (28 [82%]) included in this analysis involved female plaintiffs. Of 34 cases, 19 (56%) were resolved with a defendant verdict. The median indemnity was $150 000, and dermatologists, otolaryngologists, and plastic surgeons were the most commonly named defendants. The most common procedures were performed for age-related changes, acne scarring, hair removal, and vascular lesions, although there were also several rhinologic and airway cases. Of all cases, 25 (74%) involved cutaneous procedures, and common allegations noted included permanent injury (24 cases [71%]), disfigurement/scarring (23 [68%]), inadequate informed consent (17 [50%]), unnecessary/inappropriate procedure (15 [44%]), and burns (11 [32%]). Noncutaneous procedures had higher trending median payments ($600 000 vs $103 000), although this comparison did not reach statistical significance (P = .09)., Conclusions and Relevance: Procedures using lasers represent a potential target for malpractice litigation should an adverse event occur. Although cutaneous/cosmetic procedures were noted among cases included in this analysis, as well as other head and neck interventions, otolaryngologists were more likely to be named as defendants in the latter category. Although cases had modest indemnities compared with prior analyses, the potential for significant amounts was present. Inclusion into the informed consent process of specific factors detailed in this analysis may potentially decrease liability. In addition, physicians and patients should undergo comprehensive discussion regarding expectations as well as contingencies should adverse events occur., Level of Evidence: 4.

Objectives/hypothesis: To describe and analyze the causes and outcomes of lawsuits pertaining to sleep surgery to mitigate future litigation and improve physician education., Study Design: A retrospective review of a publicly available database containing jury verdicts and settlements., Methods: The LexisNexis MEGA Jury Verdicts and Settlements database was reviewed for all lawsuits including settlements and trial verdicts related to sleep surgery. Data including type of surgery performed, plaintiff allegation, nature of injury, outcomes, and indemnities were collected and analyzed., Results: Fifty-one cases met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 30 were decided by a jury, nine were settled out of court, and 10 were resolved by other means. Overall, 57% of known outcomes favored the defendant. The most common surgery performed was tonsillectomy (57%), followed by uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (45%), adenoidectomy (31%), and septoplasty (31%). No difference was found between outcomes when comparing the most common injuries cited, including wrongful death (P = .572), airway compromise (P = .376), and drug reaction (P = .443). If failure to recognize a complication (P = .034) or delay in diagnosis (P = .026) was a component of the legal allegations, the outcome significantly favored the plaintiff. The median settlement ($545,000) and plaintiff award ($1.45 million) were not significantly different (P = .13)., Conclusions: The majority of outcomes favored the defendant. Type of injury did not predict outcome. Failure to recognize complications and delay in diagnosis strongly predicted a verdict in favor of the plaintiff., Level of Evidence: 2c., (© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objectives/hypothesis: To better understand the causes and outcomes of lawsuits involving otolaryngologists in the past decade by analyzing malpractice litigation trends to prevent future litigation and improve physician education., Study Design: Analysis of a national database for all US civil trials., Methods: The Westlaw database was reviewed from 2001 to 2011. Data were compiled on the demographics of the plaintiffs, use of expert witnesses, procedures, nature of the injury, legal allegations, verdicts, and indemnities., Results: One hundred ninety-eight cases met inclusion criteria. Verdicts for the defendant/otolaryngologist predominated (58%), whereas the average award when the verdict favored the plaintiff was $1,782,514. When otolaryngologists were used as expert witnesses by the defense, the verdict outcome statistically favored the defendant. Two of the most commonly cited legal allegations were improper performance and failure to diagnose and treat. Fifty-one cases involved allegations of wrongful death, with the overall outcome favoring the plaintiffs (51%). The average indemnities in these cases were significantly higher for plaintiff verdicts at $2,552,580 versus settlements at $992,896. Forty-two cases involved malignancy, with the two most common allegations being failure to diagnose and treat (79%) and delay in diagnosis (74%)., Conclusions: Our study reveals that in the past decade, in significant malpractice litigations, overall outcomes favored otolaryngologists. The average awards was significantly higher when cases involved malignancy. Our analysis reveals the importance of meticulous surgical techniques and thorough preoperative evaluations. Last, when otolaryngologists are defendants in litigation, our review reiterates the value of the otolaryngologist as the defense's expert witnesses., (© 2013 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Purpose: Meningitis is a potential complication in otolaryngologic procedures and conditions. Severe sequelae make understanding factors involved in relevant malpractice litigation critical. We analyze pertinent litigation for awards, outcomes, patient demographic factors, and other alleged causes of malpractice., Methods: Pertinent jury verdict and settlement reports were examined using the Westlaw legal database (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY)., Results: Twenty-three cases (60.5%) involved non-iatrogenic injuries, including inadequate treatment or failure to diagnose sinusitis or otitis media, while 15 (39.5%) involved iatrogenic cases, mostly rhinologic procedures. 36.8% of cases were resolved for the defendant, 28.9% with juries awarding damages, and 34.2% with settlements. Although not statistically significant, mean damages awarded were higher than settlements ($2.1 vs. 1.5M, p=0.056), and cases involving pediatric patients were more likely to be resolved with payment than those with adult litigants (80.0% vs. 52.2%, p=0.08 respectively). Other frequent alleged factors included permanent deficits (63.2%), requiring additional surgery (41.1%), death (34.2%), cognitive deficits (21.2%), deafness (15.8%), and inadequate informed consent (33.0% of iatrogenic cases)., Conclusions: Practitioners facing litigation related to meningitis may wish to consider these findings, notably for cases involving death or permanent functional deficits, as cases with out of court settlements tended to be resolved with lower payments. Cases involving misdiagnosis may be more likely to be resolved with payment compared with iatrogenic cases. By understanding the issues detailed in this analysis and including them in the informed consent process for patients undergoing rhinologic and otologic procedures, otolaryngologists may potentially improve patient safety and decrease liability., (© 2014.)

Background: Our objectives were to evaluate factors raised in malpractice litigation in which plaintiffs alleged that physician negligence led to olfactory dysfunction., Methods: We analyzed publically available federal and court records using Westlaw, a widely used computerized legal database. Pertinent jury verdicts and settlements were comprehensively examined for alleged causes of malpractice (including procedures for iatrogenic causes), defendant specialty, patient demographics, and other factors raised in legal proceedings., Results: Of 25 malpractice proceedings meeting inclusion criteria, 60.0% were resolved for the defendant, 12.0% were settled, and 28.0% had jury-awarded damages. Median payments were significant ($300,000 and $412,500 for settlements and awards, respectively). Otolaryngologists were the most frequently named defendants (68.0%), with the majority of iatrogenic cases (55.0%) related to rhinologic procedures. Associated medical events accompanying anosmia included dysgeusia, cerebrospinal fluid leaks, and meningitis. Other alleged factors included requiring additional surgery (80.0%), unnecessary procedures (47.4% of iatrogenic procedural cases), untimely diagnosis leading to anosmia (44.0%), inadequate informed consent (35.0%), dysgeusia (56.0%), and psychological sequelae (24.0%)., Conclusion: Olfactory dysfunction can adversely affect quality of life and thus is a potential area for malpractice litigation. This is particularly true for iatrogenic causes of anosmia, especially following rhinologic procedures. Settlements and damages awarded were considerable, making an understanding of factors detailed in this analysis of paramount importance for the practicing otolaryngologist. This analysis reinforces the importance of explicitly including anosmia in a comprehensive informed consent process for any rhinologic procedure., (© 2013 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)

We examined the prevalence and consequences of complaints about ENT doctors lodged with the disciplinary board. In the period 1993-2012, 181 disciplinary decisions were made about ENT doctors. Relatively few complaints were made against ENT doctors compared with other medical professions; 16% of the complaints were upheld. Only the lightest measures were taken, such as warnings or reprimands. Seventy-five complaints concerned a medical-technical procedure. When focussing on surgical treatments, the most serious complaints were about endoscopic sinus surgery. In the study period (1993-2012), 448 claims were filed against ENT doctors at the largest Dutch hospital insurer for medical liability. The biggest claims were also related to endoscopic sinus surgery cases. Recommendations are made to improve the quality policy of the Dutch ENT society.

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine litigation involving epistaxis and analyze factors that determine liability., Methods: Jury verdicts and settlements regarding cases involving epistaxis were gathered utilizing the Westlaw database. Factors involved in litigation gathered included demographics, defendant specialty, procedure, alleged cause of malpractice, outcome, monetary award, and other variables., Results: A total of 26 cases were analyzed. The majority of cases (57.7%) were decided in favor of the plaintiff or settled out of court. Total awards amounted to $24,501,252. Average awards for cases decided in favor of the plaintiff were $2,260,893 and ranged from $499,845 to $9,022,643. Settlements averaged $1,084,375 and ranged from $300,000 to $3,800,000. Common causes of malpractice encountered included delay in diagnosis, complications from medical procedures, and failure to recognize complications in a timely manner., Conclusion: Contrary to previous reports analyzing malpractice for varying medical procedures and complications, litigation in epistaxis is more commonly resolved in favor of the plaintiff or resolved through out-of-court settlements. Substantial financial awards and therapeutic complications from blindness to death make epistaxis a candidate for litigation. Of importance from a medicolegal stand is the fact that 30.8% (8) of the patients involved in epistaxis litigation died, either from complications of therapy or from experiencing epistaxis as a complication of another procedure/pathology. Using necessary diagnostic imaging, ensuring proper management techniques, and recognizing complications in a timely manner can serve to limit legal liability and enhance patient safety., (© 2013 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)