Back to Search Start Over

Legal Outcomes of Litigation After Iatrogenic Genitourinary Trauma.

Authors :
Sun, Helen H.
An, Crystal
Drozd, Andrew
Rhodes, Stephen
Sellke, Nicholas
Tay, Kimberly
Mishra, Kirtishri
Scarberry, Kyle
Gupta, Shubham
Thirumavalavan, Nannan
Source :
Urology. Jul2024, Vol. 189, p49-54. 6p.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

To evaluate plaintiff and defendant characteristics associated with iatrogenic genitourinary (GU) trauma litigation and outcomes of closed claims. LexisNexis was queried in April 2023 using terms related to GU organs and injury, and manually reviewed for iatrogenic cases. Case details including defendant, organ involvement, and legal outcome were obtained. Multinomial regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with outcome. Four hundred ten cases involving 611 defendants were identified, with the ureter the most commonly affected organ (202/410, 49.3%). Most cases involved adult plaintiffs (380, 92.7%) and resulted in favor of the defense (227, 55.4%). Injuries resulted most frequently from gynecologic surgeries (179, 43.7%). Defendants were most commonly obstetricians/gynecologists (243/611, 39.8%) and urologists (168, 27.5%). Penile (OR 6.3 [95% CI 2.5-16.1]) and urethral (OR 4.8 [2.0-11.7]) injuries were associated with greater odds of a plaintiff verdict relative to ureter injury. A plaintiff verdict was also more likely when defendants were academic hospitals compared to individual practitioners (OR 4.3 [1.9-9.9]). In cases ruling in favor of the plaintiff, indemnity payments were larger when the defendants were comprised of individual practitioners compared to a hospital or medical group (median $549,613 vs $250,000, P <.001). Urologists may be involved in medical malpractice lawsuits for iatrogenic injury even when they are uninvolved in the index procedure. Most cases that reach litigation result in defense verdicts regardless of the GU organ injured. Defendant characteristics associated with plaintiff verdicts are more nuanced, and providers should be aware of potential downstream effects of litigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00904295
Volume :
189
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Urology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
178536477
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2024.05.009