Background

In the UK 70,000 knee arthroplasties are performed each year. Although outcomes from knee arthroplasties are usually excellent, they can nevertheless lead to negligence claims. The aim of this study was to establish the incidence, cost and cause of negligence claims arising from knee arthroplasties.

Patient safety is a major concern worldwide, but particularly high rates of adverse events are reported in the surgery setting. Orthopaedic and Traumatology is the speciality most frequently involved in claims in Catalonia. The objective of the study is to perform a descriptive study of the claims regarding infection in Orthopaedic and Traumatology in Catalonia.

We performed a retrospective study of the claims regarding infection in Orthopaedic and Traumatology from the prospective claims database of the Service of Professional Liability of The Catalonian Council of Official Colleges of Physicians. The time frame of data collection was from 2003 to 2013. We analyzed both the clinical and legal characteristics of the cases.

During the 10-year period, 638 registered claims were related to the practice of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, and 74 (11,6%) were due to infection. The most frequent surgical procedure involved were arthroplasty (knee, hip or shoulder) (14, 18,9%), traumatic wounds and cellulitis (12, 16,2%), spine procedures (10, 13,5%) and arthroscopy (7, 9,4%). The most frequent anatomical site involved were foot and ankle (17, 22,9%), spine (15, 20,3%), knee (14, 18,9%), wrist and hand (11, 14,8%). The 68,92% of claims was solved by the courts and 29,73% by an “out-of-court” procedure. The average compensation in cases considered to have professional liability was 145.045€.

Orthopaedic and Traumatology seem to be a specialty with a high risk for claims, and infection is one of the most important causes. The study of the claims can lead to improvements in prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment of infection in Orthopaedic and Traumatology.

Canada is second only to the United States worldwide in the number of opioid prescriptions per capita. Despite this, little is known about prescription patterns for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to detail preoperative opioid use patterns and investigate the effect it has on perioperative quality outcomes in patients undergoing elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty surgery (THA and TKA). The study cohort was constructed from hospital Discharge Abstract Data (DAD) and National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (NACRS) data, using Canadian Classification of Health Intervention codes to select all primary THA and TKA procedures from 2017-2020 in Nova Scotia. Opioid use was defined as any prescription filled at discharge as identified in the Nova Scotia Drug Information System (DIS). Emergency Department (ED) and Family Doctor (FD) visits for pain were ascertained from Physician Claims data. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test for associations controlling for confounders. Chi-squared statistics at 95% confidence level used to test for statistical significance. In total, 14,819 TJA patients were analysed and 4306 patients (29.0%) had at least one opioid prescription in the year prior to surgery. Overall, there was no significant difference noted in preoperative opiate use between patients undergoing TKA vs THA (28.8% vs 29.4%). During the period 2017-2019 we observed a declining year-on-year trend in preoperative opiate use. Interestingly, this trend failed to continue into 2020, where preoperative opiate use was observed to increase by 15% and exceeded 2017 levels. Within the first 90 days of discharge, 22.9% of TKA and 20.9% of THA patients presented to the ED or their FD with pain related issues. Preoperative opiate use was found to be a statistically significant predictor for these presentations (TKA: odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29 to 1.62; THA: OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.28 to 1.65). Preoperative opioid consumption in TJA remains high, and is independently associated with a higher risk of 90 day return to the FD or ED. The widespread dissemination of opioid reduction strategies introduced during the middle of the last decade may have reduced preoperative opiate utilisation. Access barriers and practice changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic may now have annulled this effect

Aims. Medical comorbidities are a critical factor in the decision-making process for operative management and risk-stratification. The Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC) risk adjustment model is a powerful measure of illness severity for patients treated by surgeons. The HCC is utilized by Medicare to predict medical expenditure risk and to reimburse physicians accordingly. HCC weighs comorbidities differently to calculate risk. This study determines the prevalence of medical comorbidities and the average HCC score in Medicare patients being evaluated by neurosurgeons and orthopaedic surgeon, as well as a subset of academic spine surgeons within both specialities, in the USA. Methods. The Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Database, which is based on data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ National Claims History Standard Analytic Files, was analyzed for this study. Every surgeon who submitted a valid Medicare Part B non-institutional claim during the 2013 calendar year was included in this study. This database was queried for medical comorbidities and HCC scores of each patient who had, at minimum, a single office visit with a surgeon. This data included 21,204 orthopaedic surgeons and 4,372 neurosurgeons across 54 states/territories in the USA. Results. Orthopaedic surgeons evaluated patients with a mean HCC of 1.21, while neurosurgeons evaluated patients with a mean HCC of 1.34 (p < 0.05). The rates of specific comorbidities in patients seen by orthopaedic surgeons/neurosurgeons is as follows: Ischemic heart disease (35%/39%), diabetes (31%/33%), depression (23%/31%), chronic kidney disease (19%/23%), and heart failure (17%/19%). Conclusion. Nationally, comorbidity rate and HCC value for these Medicare patients are higher than national averages for the US population, with ischemic heart disease being six-times higher, diabetes two-times higher, depression three- to four-times higher, chronic kidney disease three-times higher, and heart failure nine-times higher among patients evaluated by orthopaedic surgeons and neurosurgeons. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:257–260

The objective of this study was to quantify the burden of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) on the Ontario health care system. Specifically, we examined the magnitude and costs of MSD-associated ambulatory physician care and hospital service use, considering different physician types (e.g. primary care, rheumatologists, orthopaedic surgeons) and hospital settings (e.g. emergency department (ED), day surgery, inpatient hospitalizations). Administrative health data were analyzed for fiscal year 2013/14 for adults aged 18+ years (N=10,841,302). Data sources included: Ontario Health Insurance Plan Claims History Database, which captures data on in- and out-patient physician services, Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database, which records diagnoses and procedures associated with all inpatient hospitalizations, and CIHI National Ambulatory Care Reporting System, which captures data on all emergency department (ED) and day surgery encounters. Services associated with MSDs were identified using the single three digit International Classification of Diseases (ICD) version 9 diagnosis code provided on each physician service claim for outpatient physician visits and the “most responsible” ICD-10 diagnosis code recorded for hospitalizations, ED visits and day surgeries. Patient visit rates and numbers of patients and visits were tabulated according to care setting, patient age and sex, and physician specialty. Direct medical costs were estimated by care setting. Data were examined for all MSDs combined as well as specific diagnostic groupings, including a comprehensive list of both trauma and non-trauma related conditions. Overall, 3.1 million adult Ontarians (28.5%) made 8 million outpatient physician visits associated with MSDs in 2013/14. These included 5.6 million primary care visits, nearly 15% of all adult primary care visits in the province. MSDs accounted for 560,000, 12.3%, of all adult ED visits. Patient visit rates to the ED for non-trauma spinal conditions were the highest of all MSDs at 1032 per 100,000 population, accounting for 23% of all MSD-related ED visits. Osteoarthritis had the highest rate of inpatient hospitalization of all MSDs at 340 per 100,000 population, accounting for 42% of all MSD-related admissions. Total costs for MSD-related care were $1.6 billion, with 12.6% of costs attributed to primary care, 9.2% to specialist care, 8.6% to ED care, and 61.2% of total costs associated with inpatient hospitalizations. Costs due to ‘arthritis and related conditions’ as a group accounted for 40.1% of total MSD costs ($966 million). Costs due to non-trauma related spinal conditions accounted for 10.5% ($168 million) of total MSD costs. All trauma-related conditions (spine and non-spine combined) were responsible for 39.4% ($627 million) of total MSD costs. MSD-related imaging costs for patients who made physician visits for MSDs were $169 million. Including these costs yields a total of $1.8 billion. MSDs place a significant and costly burden on the health care system. As the population ages, it will be essential that health system planning takes into account the large and escalating demand for MSD care, both in terms of health human resources planning and the implementation of more clinically and cost effective models of care, to reduce both the individual and population burden

There are numerous examples in medicine where “eminence trumps evidence.” The direct anterior approach (DA) is no exception. Its meteoric rise has largely been driven by industry and surgeon promotion. This surgical approach continues to garner interest, but this interest is largely for marketing purposes, as emerging data would suggest a high risk, low reward operation. In addition, factors such as selection bias and impact bias, have substantially swayed peoples interest into making an inferior operation look better. There are several factors related to the direct anterior approach that should give us pause. Those include the surgeon learning curve, limited functional benefit and increased complications. There is no question the DA approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) has a long and steep learning curve. The majority of studies would suggest at minimum, 50–100 cases before a surgeon is comfortable with this approach and some studies would suggest the technical difficulties of this approach remain an issue even with increasing experience. This proves difficult with an attempted rapid adoption of this technique by a surgeon who may perform less than 50 THAs per year but feel the need to offer this approach to their patients for marketing purposes. One of the many touted benefits of the DA approach is the perception of improved functional outcomes. Many of the early studies showed early improvement in gait, pain and mobility. However, these studies compared the DA approach to an anterolateral approach. Even when compared to the anterolateral approach, considered the most invasive and least muscle sparing, the benefits of the DA approach were only short term (6 weeks). The majority of retrospective studies, prospective randomised studies and meta-analyses comparing DA to a posterior approach show little, if any, benefit of one approach over another with regards to functional benefit. Another touted benefit includes a low or no dislocation risk associated with the posterior approach. On the contrary many studies have failed to demonstrate lower dislocation rates with the DA approach compared to a contemporary posterior approach. A recent registry study from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Quality Initiative (MARQI) showed equal dislocation rates between the DA and posterior approach. Concerns have also been raised regarding unique and more frequent complications with the DA approach compared to other surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty. Unique complications such as ankle fractures and a high incidence of nerve injury, especially damage to the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve, have been reported. In addition, the data now clearly show a higher incidence of complications on the femoral side, including early loosening and periprosthetic fracture. As responsible surgeons, if we want to say the DA approach is different, then fine, we can say it's different. Claims of superiority of one approach over another have not been born our in the literature and in fact much of the data would suggest a high risk no reward operation for the DA approach compared to other surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty

Claims for clinical negligence are increasing annually. Limb reconstructive surgery recognises ‘problems, obstacles, and complications’ as part of the treatment process, but this does not prevent a claim for an alleged poor result or a complication. We analysed claims for clinical negligence in the National Health Service in England and Wales for issues following limb reconstructive surgery. A database of all 10,456 claims related to Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery from 1995–2010 was obtained from the NHS Litigation Authority. A Search Function for keywords “Ilizarov, limb reconstruction, external fixation, and pin-site” was used for subset analysis. Data was analysed for type of complaint, whether defended or not, and for costs. 52 claims fitted our filters - 48 were closed, and 4 ongoing. The claims included damage to local structures (n=3), missed compartment syndrome (n=2), premature frame removal (n=5), infection (n=13), wrong-site-surgery (n=1), poor outcome (n=16) and technical error (n=10). Seven patients underwent amputation. The total cost of litigation was £4,444,344, with a mean of £90,700 per settled claim. 40% were successfully defended, with defence cost of £15,322. The mean pay-out for confirmed negligence/liability was £90,056 (£1,500-£419,999, median £45,000) per case. We believe this is the first study looking at complications following limb reconstruction from this perspective. Analysis reveals a spectrum of claims for negligence. Perceived technical errors and poor outcome predominate. Whilst the limitations of the database preclude against identification of whether the procedures were carried out in specialist units, claims for technical errors are a cause for concern. These will be discussed in detail. Outcomes following limb reconstruction are difficult to quantify, and the settling of claims for a perceived poor outcome makes the case for pre-operative counselling and the need for robust outcome measures in our specialty