Litigation Following Carpal Tunnel Release.
Аннотация
Background
Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is the most common hand surgery operation performed in the United States. While serious complications are rare, they can be life-altering to patients. In some cases, patients will pursue malpractice claims against the surgeon. This study aimed to understand the patient, procedure, and surgeon factors involved in CTR malpractice litigation.
Methods
The Westlaw legal database was queried for all recorded CTR malpractice cases resulting in jury verdicts and settlements. Only cases directly related to injury after CTR were included in this study. Cases were reviewed to determine plaintiff demographics, defendant training, liability, injury, outcomes, and monetary awards.
Results
Ninety-two unique cases were identified. Plaintiffs were predominantly female (n = 65, 71%). Most surgeons were orthopedic-trained (n = 37, 52%). Only 27% of defendants (n = 19) were hand fellowship-trained. Only 19% of cases resulting in a monetary award were against surgeons who had hand fellowship training. The majority of cases (n = 61, 66%) were found in favor of the defendant. Monetary awards averaged $305 923 (range = $12 000-1 338 147), while settlements averaged $266 250. Alleged liability was most for surgeon negligence (n = 69, 75%) with a third of cases resulting in monetary awards. Median nerve injury was claimed in 41 cases (45%), with 17 (41%) resulting in monetary awards.
Conclusion
Although CTR is generally safe and effective, some patients will experience complications. Median nerve injury was the most common reason for successful litigation in this study. Adequate training and experience in hand surgery may lower the risk of injuries resulting in successful malpractice suits.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.