PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15912046

Trauma surgery malpractice risk: perception versus reality.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We set out to compare the malpractice lawsuit risk and incidence in trauma surgery, emergency surgery, and elective surgery at a single academic medical center. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: The perceived increased malpractice risk attributed to trauma patients discourages participation in trauma call panels and may influence career choice of surgeons. When questioned, surgeons cite malpractice risk as a rationale for not providing trauma care. Little data substantiate or refute the perceived high trauma malpractice risk. We hypothesized that the malpractice risk was equivalent between an elective surgical practice and a trauma/emergency practice. METHODS: Three prospectively maintained institutional databases were used to calculate and characterize malpractice incidence and risk: a surgical operation database, a trauma registry, and a risk management/malpractice database. Risk groups were divided into elective general surgery (ELECTIVE), urgent/emergent, nontrauma general surgery (URGENT), and trauma surgery (TRAUMA). Malpractice claims incidence was calculated by dividing the total number of filed lawsuits by the total number of operative procedures over a 12-year period. RESULTS: Over the study period, 62,350 operations were performed. A total of 21 lawsuits were served. Seven were dismissed. Three were granted summary judgments to the defendants. Ten were settled with payments to the plaintiffs. One went to trial and resulted in a jury verdict in favor of the defendants. Total paid liability was 4.7 million dollars(391,667 dollars/year). Total legal defense costs were 1.3 million dollars(108,333 dollars/year). The ratio of lawsuits filed/operations performed and incidence in the 3 groups is as follows: ELECTIVE 14/39,080 (3.0 lawsuits/100,000 procedures/year), URGENT 5/17,958, (2.3 lawsuits/100,000 procedures/year), and TRAUMA 2/5312 (3.1/100,000 procedures/year). During the study period, there were an estimated 49,435 trauma patients evaluated. The incidence of malpractice lawsuits using this denominator is 0.34 lawsuits/100,000 patients/year. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate no increased risk of lawsuit when caring for trauma patients, and the actual risk of a malpractice lawsuit was low.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ronald M Stewart, Joe Johnston, Kathy Geoghegan, Tiffany Anthony, John G Myers, Daniel L Dent, Michael G Corneille, Daren S Danielson, H David Root, Basil A Pruitt, Stephen M Cohn. 2005. Trauma surgery malpractice risk: perception versus reality.. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000164179.48276.45

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Performance of the FearID earprint identification system.

The Forensic Ear Identification (FearID) research project was started in order to study the strength of evidence of earprints found on crime scenes. For this purpose, a sample of earprints from 1229 donors over three countries was collected. From each donor three left and three right earprints were gathered. On the one hand, operators denoted contours of the earprints to facilitate segmentation of the images, on the other anthropological specialists denoted anatomically specific locations. On the basis of this, methods for automated classification were developed and used for training of a system that classifies pairs of prints as 'matching' or 'non-matching'. Comparing lab quality prints, the system has an equal error rate of 4%. Starting from a reference database containing two prints per ear, hitlist behaviour is such that in 90% of all query searches the best hit is in the top 0.1% of the list. The results become less favourable (equal error rate of 9%) for print/mark comparisons.

Databases, Factual↗

Normal limits of ejection fraction and volumes determined by gated SPECT in clinically normal patients without cardiac events: a study based on the J-ACCESS database.

PURPOSE: Quantitative gated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is known to have high accuracy and precision for measurement of the principal cardiac functional parameters. We hypothesised that normal values for EF and LV volumes may differ among nationalities, and that optimal threshold values specific to the study population are required. METHODS: Among 4,670 consecutively registered patients for a J-ACCESS (Japanese investigation regarding prognosis based on gated SPECT) study from 117 hospitals, a total of 268 (149 women, 119 men) were selected who had no baseline cardiac diseases and had experienced no cardiac events during the preceding 3-year period. A gated SPECT study was performed with 99mTc-tetrofosmin and analysed with Cedars Sinai Medical Center's quantitative gated SPECT (QGS) software. The results in respect of ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and stroke volume (SV), and EDV, ESV and SV normalised by body surface area (EDVI, ESVI and SVI), were calculated and summarised to obtain normal limits. RESULTS: EF for women and men was 74 +/- 9% and 63 +/- 7%, respectively (p < 0.0001). EDV, ESV and SV were significantly smaller in women than in men. Based on multiple regressions for linear models, the primary and secondary predictors of EF, EDVI, ESVI were gender and age. By stepwise multiple regression analysis, a statistically significant third predictor for EDV, ESV, SV and SVI was body weight. No colinearity was found between age and body weight. Important factors for the studied Japanese population included a high incidence of small hearts in women and the relatively advanced age of the population (the mean age +/-SD was 64.1 +/- 10.0 years for women and 60.9 +/- 11.7 years for men). CONCLUSION: EF and volumes determined by gated SPECT with QGS were significantly affected by gender and age, with body weight as a third predictor for volumes. Moreover, the normal limits were so specific for the population studied that standards appropriate for the study in question should be utilised.

Databases, Factual↗