Medical malpractice claims in Hepatology: Rates, Reasons, and Results

Clinicians are motivated to provide safe, high-quality care to patients with chronic liver disease. This includes the desire to avoid litigation. Data are limited regarding the actual sources of medicolegal risk in chronic liver disease. METHODS: We conducted a review of a national liability insurer (Candello) with an additional granular analysis of our institution’s registry of liability claims. We included closed cases involving chronic liver disease-related encounters between 2012 and 2021. We determined rates of legal claims from a denominator of unique patients with cirrhosis or transplant care seen over the study period. RESULTS: Local database: We retrieved 39 claims of which 15 involved patients with non-cirrhotic chronic liver disease, 13 involved cirrhosis (0.06% incidence), and 11 involved patients who underwent transplantation (0.6% incidence). Most claims involved periprocedural complications. Others included adverse reactions to prophylactic plasma transfusion, medication-induced HE, and falls/fractures. NATIONAL DATABASE: We found 94 claims related to liver disease out of 102,575 (0.09%) total claims. Overall, 56% involved diagnosis-related issues (failure/delay in ordering a diagnostic test, failure to appreciate and reconcile a symptom/sign or result, or the misinterpretation of a diagnostic study). Miscommunication between providers and between providers and patients was implicated in 22% of cases. Patient behavior-related factors (nonadherence with scheduled appointments, treatments, or diagnostic testing) factored in 20% of cases. Selection or the management of therapy played a role in 7% of cases. Very rarely were cases associated with technical skill (4%), house staff supervision (3%), or weekend/holiday care (1%). Fifty-one (55%) claims involved HCC. CONCLUSION: We provide the rates and reasons for medical malpractice claims in hepatology.