Glaucoma-related malpractice litigation in the United States: A review of the WestLaw database

Abstract

Purpose Gaining understanding of glaucoma-related malpractice litigation may highlight ways to improve patient care and minimize risk of litigation. This study aims to analyze the outcomes and characteristics of glaucoma-related malpractice litigation. Materials and Methods The Westlaw legal database (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY, USA) was used to identify cases regarding ‘malpractice’ AND ‘glaucoma’ or related terms. Cases were analyzed for characteristics such as alleged cause of malpractice, outcome, and demographics. Results The initial search terms yielded 498 results, 107 of which met further inclusion criteria. 38 (36%) were resolved via jury trial. Of these, verdicts in favor of the plaintiff were issued in 14 cases (34%), with median adjusted damages of $702,986. Of all 107 cases in the study reviewed, 65 (61%) resulted in verdicts in favor of the defendant. Ophthalmologists were named as defendants in 85% of the cases (with glaucoma specialists representing 7% of the ophthalmologists); optometrists in 24%. Sixty percent of the cases involved non-surgical treatment. The most common medical reasons for litigation were failure to diagnose (38%), and inappropriate/negligent treatment (36%). The most commonly litigated surgical procedures were cataract surgery (48%) and iridotomy/iridectomy (19%). Conclusion Glaucoma-malpractice litigation has increased, with medical mismanagement alleged in the majority of cases. Defendants are frequently successful in obtaining pre-trial dismissal, but the risk of liability increases in cases going to trial. A minority of cases involved glaucoma specialists. This historical analysis of glaucoma-related malpractice cases might provide perspective and aid physicians seeking to avoid litigation.