LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Physician and patients factors associated with outcome of spinal epidural abscess related malpractice litigation

Spinal epidural abscesses (SEA) can be challenging to diagnose and may result in serious adverse outcomes sometimes leading to neurologic compromise, sepsis, and even death. While SEA may lead to… Click to show full abstract

Spinal epidural abscesses (SEA) can be challenging to diagnose and may result in serious adverse outcomes sometimes leading to neurologic compromise, sepsis, and even death. While SEA may lead to litigation for healthcare providers, little is known about the medicolegal factors predicting case outcome of SEA related litigation cases. Three large medicolegal databases (VerdictSearch, Westlaw, and LexisNexis) were queried for SEA-related malpractice cases. Plaintiff (patient) age, sex, previous infection history and clinical outcomes such as residual paraplegia/quadriplegia, and delay in diagnosis or treatment were examined. The relationship between these variables and the proportion of plaintiff rulings and size of indemnity payments were assessed. Of the 135 cases that met inclusion criteria, 29 (21.5%) settled, 59 (43.7%) resulted in a defendant ruling, and 47 (34.8%) resulted in a plaintiff ruling. Mean award for plaintiff rulings was $4,291,400 (95% CI, $5,860,129 to $2,722,671), which was significantly larger than mean awards for cases that settled out of court, $2,324,170 (95% CI, $3,206,124 to $1,442,217) (P<0.05). The proportion of plaintiff verdicts and size of monetary awards were not significantly related to age or sex of the patient. A previously known infection was not significantly associated with the proportion of plaintiff verdicts or indemnity payments (P>0.05). In contrast, plaintiff verdicts were more common for patients who became paraplegic or quadriplegic (P<0.02) and were associated with significantly higher monetary awards (P<0.05) relative to patients without paralysis. Plaintiff verdicts were also more common when cases had an associated delay in diagnosis (P=0.008) or delay in treatment (P<0.001). Internists were the most commonly sued physician named in 20 (14.8%) suits, followed by anesthesiologists in 13 (9.6%) suits, emergency medicine physicians in 12 (8.9%) suits, family medicine physicians in 9 (6.7%) suits, neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons in 6 (4.4%) suits each, and multiple providers in 2 (1.5%) suits. The remaining lawsuits were against a hospital or another specialty not previously listed This investigation examined legal claims associated with SEA and found that the likelihood of a plaintiff verdict was significantly related to patient outcome (paralysis) and physician factors (delay in diagnosis or treatment compared). Additionally, paralyzed plaintiffs receive higher award payouts. Non-operative physicians, who are often responsible for initial diagnosis, were more frequently named in malpractice suits than surgeons. Increased awareness of the medicolegal implications of SEA can better prevent delays in diagnosis and treatment, and thus, alleged negligence-based lawsuits.

Keywords: litigation; plaintiff; diagnosis; related malpractice; spinal epidural

Journal Title: Orthopedic Reviews
Year Published: 2018

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.