Search

Background: Due to disparaging costs and rates of malpractice claims in neurosurgery, there has been significant interest in identifying high-risk specialties, types of malpractice claims, and characteristics of claim-prone physicians., Objective: To characterize the malpractice claims against neurosurgeons., Methods: This was a comprehensive analysis of all malpractice liability claims involving a neurosurgeon as the primary defendant, conducted using the Physician Insurers Association of America Data Sharing Project from January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2012., Results: From 2003 to 2012, 2131 closed malpractice claims were filed against a neurosurgeon. The total amount of indemnity paid collective between 1998 to 2002, 2003 to 2007, and 2008 to 2012 was $109 614 935, $140 031 875, and $122 577 230, respectively. Of all the neurosurgery claims, the most prevalent chief medical factor was improper performance (42.1%, $124 943 933), presenting medical condition was intervertebral disc disorder (20.6%, $54 223 206), and operative procedure performed involved the spinal cord and/or spinal canal (21.0%, $62 614 995). Eighty-five (22.91%) of the total neurosurgery claims resulted in patient death, resulting in $32 067 759 paid. Improper performance of the actual procedure was the most prevalent and highest total paid cause for patient death ($9 584 519)., Conclusion: From 2003 to 2012, we found that neurosurgery malpractice claims rank among one of the most costly and prevalent, with the average indemnities paid annually and the overall economic burden increasing. Diagnoses and procedures involving the spine, along with improper performance, were the most prevalent malpractice claims against neurosurgeons. Continued medical malpractice reform is essential to correct the overall health care cost burdens, and ultimately improve patient safety.

Background: Of all specialists, neurosurgeons have the highest probability of facing a medical malpractice claim. Here we report the first specialty-wide review of malpractice claims in neurosurgery performed using a well-established national online legal database., Methods: The Westlaw legal research service (Thomson Reuters, Eagan, Minnesota, USA) was queried for jury verdicts and settlements related to neurosurgery and medical malpractice between 1985 and 2015. Case files were examined, and factors recorded included the age and sex of the patient, the state and year in which the verdict was reached, defendant specialties, award payouts, and alleged reasons for malpractice. Case files were sorted into neurosurgical subspecialties based on the nature of the condition and the type of treatment administered., Results: A total of 516 cases were identified, and 343 cases were analyzed. A defendant's verdict was reached in 165 (48.1%) cases, and a plaintiff's verdict was reached in 93 (27.1%) cases. A settlement was reached in 81 cases (23.6%). The median payout for plaintiff's verdicts was $2,550,000 (range, $80,000-$216,849,187), and that for settlements was $1,300,000 (range, $100,000-$13,300,000). Procedural error (45.5%), a failure to diagnose (41.4%), or a failure to treat (42.9%) were the most commonly cited reasons for litigation. Neurosurgeons accounted for 21.1% of defendants. The median plaintiff award payout was highest for pediatric cases ($10,100,000)., Conclusions: A defendant's verdict was reached in nearly one-half of the cases. In instances where a plaintiff's verdict was reached, large payouts were common, especially in pediatric and cerebrovascular cases. An emphasis on reducing procedural error, and making timely differential diagnoses, may reduce future litigation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Despite substantial progress in modernising neurosurgery, the specialty still tops the list of medico-legal claims. Understanding the factors associated with negligence claims is vital if we are to identify areas of underperformance and subsequently improve patient safety. Here we provide data on trends in neurosurgical negligence claims over a 10-year period in England., Methods: We used data provided by the National Health Service Litigation Authority to analyse negligence claims related to neurosurgery from the financial years 2002/2003 to 2011/2012. Using the abstracts provided, we extracted information pertaining to the underlying pathology, injury severity, nature of misadventure and claim value., Results: Over the 10-year period, the annual number of claims increased significantly. In total, there were 794 negligence claims (range 50-117/year); of the 613 closed cases, 405 (66.1%) were successful. The total cost related to claims during the 10 years was £65.7 million, with a mean claim per successful case of £0.16 million (total damages, defence and claimant costs of £45.1, £6.36 and £14.3 million, respectively). Claims related to emergency cases were more costly compared to those of elective cases (£209,327 vs. £112,627; P=0.002). Spinal cases represented the most frequently litigated procedures (350; 44.1% of total), inadequate surgical performance the most common misadventure (231; 29.1%) and fatality the commonest injury implicated in claims (102; 12.8%). Negligence claims related to wrong-site surgery and cauda equina syndrome were frequently successful (26/26; 100% and 14/16; 87.5% of closed cases, respectively)., Conclusion: In England, the number of neurosurgical negligence claims is increasing, the financial cost substantial, and the burden significant. Lessons to be learned from the study are of paramount importance to reduce future cases of negligence and improve patient care.

Object: The potential imbalance between malpractice liability cost and quality of care has been an issue of debate. We investigated the association of malpractice liability with unfavorable outcomes and increased hospitalization charges in cranial neurosurgery., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study involving patients who underwent cranial neurosurgical procedures from 2005-2010, and were registered in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. We used data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) from 2005 to 2010 to create measures of volume and size of malpractice claim payments. The association of the latter with the state-level mortality, length of stay (LOS), unfavorable discharge, and hospitalization charges for cranial neurosurgery was investigated., Results: During the study period, there were 189,103 patients (mean age 46.4 years, with 48.3% females) who underwent cranial neurosurgical procedures, and were registered in NIS. In a multivariable regression, higher number of claims per physician in a state was associated with increased ln-transformed hospitalization charges (beta 0.18; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.19). On the contrary, there was no association with mortality (OR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.06). We observed a small association with unfavorable discharge (OR 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.13), and LOS (beta 0.01; 95% CI, 0.002 to 0.03). The size of the awarded claims demonstrated similar relationships. The average claims payment size (ln-transformed) (Pearson's rho=0.435, P=0.01) demonstrated a positive correlation with the risk-adjusted hospitalization charges but did not demonstrate a correlation with mortality, unfavorable discharge, or LOS., Conclusions: In the present national study, aggressive malpractice environment was not correlated with mortality but was associated with higher hospitalization charges after cranial neurosurgery. In view of the association of malpractice with the economics of healthcare, further research on its impact is necessary.

Background: Concern over rising healthcare expenditures has led to increased scrutiny of medical practices. As medical liability and malpractice risk rise to crisis levels, the medical-legal environment has contributed to the practice of defensive medicine as practitioners attempt to mitigate liability risk. High-risk specialties, such as neurosurgery, are particularly affected and neurosurgeons have altered their practices to lessen medical-legal risk. We present the first national survey of American neurosurgeons' perceptions of malpractice liability and defensive medicine practices., Methods: A validated, 51-question online-survey was sent to 3344 practicing U.S. neurosurgeon members of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, which represents 76% of neurosurgeons in academic and private practices., Results: A total of 1028 surveys were completed (31% response rate) by neurosurgeons representing diverse sub-specialty practices. Respondents engaged in defensive medicine practices by ordering additional imaging studies (72%), laboratory tests (67%), referring patients to consultants (66%), or prescribing medications (40%). Malpractice premiums were considered a "major or extreme" burden by 64% of respondents which resulted in 45% of respondents eliminating high-risk procedures from their practice due to liability concerns., Conclusions: Concerns and perceptions about medical liability lead practitioners to practice defensive medicine. As a result, diagnostic testing, consultations and imaging studies are ordered to satisfy a perceived legal risk, resulting in higher healthcare expenditures. To minimize malpractice risk, some neurosurgeons have eliminated high-risk procedures. Left unchecked, concerns over medical liability will further defensive medicine practices, limit patient access to care, and increase the cost of healthcare delivery in the United States.

Object: Neurosurgeons are a high-risk group for allegations of malpractice. To determine the kinds of cases and the neurosurgical practice patterns associated with the highest proportion of litigation, the authors examined the experience over a 5-year period of a major physician-owned and -administered insurance company dealing with this issue, the Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company (MLMIC) of New York. With the MLMIC cases as a basis, the authors also analyzed areas of physician vulnerability and determined the steps neurosurgeons can take to reduce potential litigation., Methods: All cases closed against MLMIC-insured neurosurgeons from January 1, 1999, through December 30, 2003, were reviewed. Variables examined included allegation, anatomical site, and the ultimate resolution of the case. Of the 280 cases against neurosurgeons that were closed during the study period, 156 (56%) involved the spine, 109 (39%) involved the head and/or brain, and 15 (5%) reflected miscellaneous allegations. These proportions are relatively similar to the 1999 procedural statistics for neurosurgical practices. Of the cases examined, 98 were closed with a total loss indemnity of approximately $50 million, and 182 resulted in no indemnity payment., Conclusions: A neurosurgeon's chances of being sued for malpractice are not necessarily related to the medical complexity of a particular case but rather to the types of cases with which the physician is involved. Elective spinal surgery cases constitute the majority of litigation. Neurosurgeons can take steps to reduce their vulnerability to potential litigation and to increase the odds of a successful defense.

While the causes of rapidly rising medical malpractice insurance premiums remain contentious and unsettled, the consequences are rippling through communities, threatening to diminish patients' access to care and increase health care costs, with an uncertain impact on quality, according to findings from the Center for Studying Health System Change's (HSC) 2002-03 site visits to 12 nationally representative communities. The severity of malpractice insurance problems varied across communities, with some physicians changing how and where they care for patients. For example, rather than treat patients in their offices, more physicians are referring patients to emergency departments. And many physicians, especially those practicing in high-risk specialties, are unwilling to provide emergency department on-call coverage because of malpractice liability concerns.

A survey of Florida neurosurgeons was conducted in April 1993 with a 68% response rate. One hundred twenty-three (81%) had malpractice insurance. Of the 29 (19%) without insurance, all but one practiced in South Florida. Cost was the major factor in dropping coverage. The cutoff appeared to be in excess of $100,000 per year for coverage for $250,000 per incident. Over 50% have considered early retirement. Those without coverage are limiting patient access. The number unable to afford minimal coverage is likely to increase; consequently patient access will continue to decline unless reforms allow coverage at a reasonable cost.