Predictors of Medical Malpractice Outcomes After Spine Surgery: A Comprehensive Analysis From 2010 to 2019.

Abstract

Retrospective review of spine surgery malpractice cases. The aim was to compare medical malpractice outcomes among different types of spine surgery and identify predictors of litigation outcomes. Spine surgery is highly litigious in the United States with data suggesting favorable outcomes for defendant surgeons. However, factor specific data and explanations for plaintiff verdicts are lacking. Westlaw legal database was queried for spine surgery malpractice outcomes from 2010 to 2019. Clinical data, reasons for litigation, and legal outcomes were tabulated. Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors associated with litigation outcomes. A total of 257 cases were identified for inclusion. There were 98 noninstrumented and 148 instrumented cases; 110 single-level and 99 multilevel; 83 decompressions, 95 decompression and fusions, and 47 fusion only. In all, 182 (71%) resulted in a defendant verdict, 44 (17%) plaintiff verdict, and 31 (12%) settlement. Plaintiff verdicts resulted in payouts of $2.03 million, while settlements resulted in $1.11 million (P=0.34). Common reasons for litigation were intraoperative error, hardware complication, and improper postoperative management. Cases were more likely to result for the plaintiff if postoperative cauda equina syndrome (55% vs. 26%, P<0.01), a surgical site infection (46% vs. 27%, P=0.03), or other catastrophic injury (40% vs. 26%, P=0.03) occurred. Higher monetary awards were associated with multi versus single-level (median: $2.61 vs. $0.92 million, P=0.01), improper postoperative management cited (median: $2.29 vs. $1.12 million, P=0.04), and permanent neurological deficits ($2.29 vs. $0.78 million, P<0.01). Plaintiff payouts were more likely if defendant specialty was neurosurgery versus orthopedic surgery (33% vs. 18%, P=0.01). Spine surgery is a litigious field with multiple factors associated with outcomes. Efforts to reduce intraoperative errors and complications may improve patient care and decrease the risk of litigation.