Causes de plaintes après arthroplastie totale primaire de hanche en France : données assurantielles de 240 expertises de 2014 à 2017

Abstract

Introduction: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most frequent orthopedic surgery procedures, and orthopedic surgeons are among the most frequently accused of malpractice by their patients. Identifying the main reasons for malpractice claims after THA is a prior condition to reducing their frequency. The quality of the preoperative risk information given to the patient by the surgeon is crucial for these purposes. Data specific to THA are sparse in France, and we therefore conducted a retrospective study 1) to determine whether the outcome of medico-legal expert appraisal correlated with the quality and traceability of preoperative information, and 2) to identify the most frequent grounds for complaint after primary THA.Hypothesis: The quality of patient information partly determines expert appraisal.Material and Method: A retrospective study was conducted based on data from the Branchet medical professional insurance agency for malpractice claims following THA over the period 2014-2017, with 240 complete files, for 125 women and 115 men. Data comprised: type of procedure, main grounds of complaint (complications), positive or negative expert appraisal, quality of preoperative patient information, amounts of compensation accorded and fees paid, and the practitioner’s liability. We assessed correlations between information quality and liability.Results: Surgical site infection and neurologic deficit were the two main grounds for malpractice claims. In the 240 files, cases for 106 operations (44.2%) were submitted to arbitration, 95 (39.6%) were brought to court, and 39 (16.2%) were settled out of court. The practitioner was held at least partly liable in 40 files (16.7%). Information to the patient was deemed imperfect or poor for 119 files (49.6%) and good in 121 (50.4%). Mean compensation was euro 30,940 (range, euro 0 to euro 198,100).In 27 of the 40 cases of liability (67.5%), the information to the patient was deemed imperfect or poor. Twenty-six of the 40 cases (65%) were settled out of court.In case of poor information, there was a significant risk for the practitioner to be held liable: 7.5% vs 25% (p=0.003).Discussion: The present study listed the main complications underlying malpractice claims after THA: infection, neurologic complications, and limb-length discrepancy. This should enable practitioners to improve patient information so as to reduce the rate of malpractice claims or at least decrease the practitioner’s liability, as the study found a correlation between information quality and expert appraisal.Level of evidence: IV; retrospective study.