Cargando…

Spine-Related Malpractice Claims in China: A 2-year National Analysis

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors of spine-related malpractice claims in China in a 2-year period. METHODS: The arbitration files of the Chinese Medical Association (CMA) were reviewed for spine-related malp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yue, Lei, Sun, Ming-Shuai, Mu, Guan-Zhang, Shang, Mei-Xia, Zhang, Ying-Ze, Sun, Hao-Lin, Li, Chun-De
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10448087/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34519250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211041048
Descripción
Sumario:STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors of spine-related malpractice claims in China in a 2-year period. METHODS: The arbitration files of the Chinese Medical Association (CMA) were reviewed for spine-related malpractice claims. Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis were conducted on claim characteristics, clinical data, plaintiff’s main allegations, and arbitration outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 288 cases of spinal claims filed in the CMA between January 2016 and December 2017 were included. Most claims were found in lumbar degenerative disorders (59.4%), lumbar trauma (13.2%), and cervical degenerative disorders (11.8%). The most common adverse events (AEs) leading to claims were new neurologic deficit (NND) (47.6%), infection (11.5%), and insufficient symptom relief (10.4%). The most common patient allegation was surgical error (66.0%), although the main arbitrated cause of AEs was disease/treatment itself (49.0%), while providers were judged as mainly responsible in only 47.3% cases. In multivariate regression analysis, cervical spine, misdiagnosis/mistreatment, and unpredictable emergency correlated with more severe damage to patients; minimally invasive surgery was predictive of judgment in plaintiff’s favor, while claims in the eastern region and unpredictable emergencies were predictive of defendant’s favor; only NND was associated with being arbitrated as surgical error in surgical cases where surgeons accepted major liability. CONCLUSION: The current study provided a descriptive overview and risk factor analysis of spine-related malpractice claims in China. Gaining improved understanding of the facts and causes of malpractice claims may help providers reduce the risk of claims and subsequent litigation.