We present a review of claims made to the NHS
Litigation Authority (NHSLA) by patients with conditions affecting the
shoulder and elbow, and identify areas of dissatisfaction and potential
improvement. Between 1995 and 2012, the NHSLA recorded 811 claims
related to the shoulder and elbow, 581 of which were settled. This
comprised 364 shoulder (64%), and 217 elbow (36%) claims. A total
of £18.2 million was paid out in settled claims. Overall diagnosis,
mismanagement and intra-operative nerve injury were the most common
reasons for litigation. The highest cost paid out resulted from
claims dealing with incorrect, missed or delayed diagnosis, with
just under £6 million paid out overall. Fractures and dislocations
around the shoulder and elbow were common injuries in this category.
All 11 claims following wrong-site surgery that were settled led
to successful payouts. This study highlights the diagnoses and procedures that need
to be treated with particular vigilance. Having an awareness of
the areas that lead to litigation in shoulder and elbow surgery
will help to reduce inadvertent risks to patients and prevent dissatisfaction
and possible litigation. Cite this article:
The results of hip and knee replacement surgery
are generally regarded as positive for patients. Nonetheless, they are
both major operations and have recognised complications. We present
a review of relevant claims made to the National Health Service
Litigation Authority. Between 1995 and 2010 there were 1004 claims
to a value of £41.5 million following hip replacement surgery and
523 claims to a value of £21 million for knee replacement. The most common
complaint after hip surgery was related to residual neurological
deficit, whereas after knee replacement it was related to infection.
Vascular complications resulted in the highest costs per case in
each group. Although there has been a large increase in the number of operations
performed, there has not been a corresponding relative increase
in litigation. The reasons for litigation have remained largely
unchanged over time after hip replacement. In the case of knee replacement,
although there has been a reduction in claims for infection, there
has been an increase in claims for technical errors. There has also
been a rise in claims for non-specified dissatisfaction. This information
is of value to surgeons and can be used to minimise the potential
mismatch between patient expectation, informed consent and outcome. Cite this article:
Procedures performed at the incorrect anatomical site are commonly perceived as being relatively rare. However, they can be a devastating event for patients and doctors. Evidence from the United Kingdom and North America suggests that wrong-site, wrong-procedure and wrong-patient events occur more commonly than we think. Furthermore, their incidence may be increasing as NHS Trusts increase the volume and complexity of procedures undertaken in order to cope with increasing demands on the system. In previous studies from North America orthopaedic surgery has been found to be the worst-offending specialty. In this paper we review the existing literature on wrong-site surgery and analyse data from the National Patient Safety Agency and NHS Litigation Authority on 292 cases of wrong-site surgery in England and Wales. Orthopaedic surgery accounted for 87 (29.8%) of these cases. In the year 2006 to 2007, the rate of wrong-site surgery in England and Wales was highest in orthopaedic surgery, in which the estimated rate was 1:105 712 cases.
We summarise and highlight the safety concerns
within the field of trauma and orthopaedic surgery with particular
emphasis placed on current controversies and reforms within the United
Kingdom National Health Service.
The June 2015 Spine Roundup360 looks at: Less is more in pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis; Paracetamol out of favour in spinal pain but effective for osteoarthritis; Local wound irrigation to reduce infection?; Lumbar facet joint effusion: a reliable prognostic sign?; SPORT for the octogenarian; Neurological deterioration following traumatic spinal cord injury; PROMS in spinal surgery