Closed Claims Project Database Research Articles

This Month in Anesthesiology

This Month in Anesthesiology

Communication failures contributing to patient injury in anaesthesia malpractice claims☆

BackgroundCommunication amongst team members is critical to providing safe, effective medical care. We investigated the role of communication failures in patient injury using the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database. MethodsClaims associated with surgical/procedural and obstetric anaesthesia and postoperative pain management for adverse events from 2004 or later were included. Communication was defined as transfer of information between two or more parties. Failure was defined as communication that was incomplete, inaccurate, absent, or not timely. We classified root causes of failures as content, audience, purpose, or occasion with inter-rater reliability assessed by kappa. Claims with communication failures contributing to injury (injury-related communication failures; n=389) were compared with claims without any communication failures (n=521) using Fisher's exact test, t-test, or Mann–Whitney U-tests. ResultsAt least one communication failure contributing to patient injury occurred in 43% (n=389) out of 910 claims (κ=0.885). Patients in claims with injury-related communication failures were similar to patients in claims without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings (34% vs 26%; P=0.004). Fifty-two claims had multiple communication failures for a total of 446 injury-related failures, and 47% of failures occurred during surgery, 28% preoperatively, and 23% postoperatively. Content failures (insufficient, inaccurate, or no information transmitted) accounted for 60% of the 446 communication failures. ConclusionsCommunication failure contributed to patient injury in 43% of anaesthesia malpractice claims. Patient/case characteristics in claims with communication failures were similar to those without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings.

Haematoma, Abscess or Meningitis After Neuraxial Anesthesia in the USA and the Netherlands: A Closed Claims Analysis

(Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2020;37:743–751) Current anesthesia practice often involves neuraxial techniques such as spinal anesthesia and epidural analgesia. The leading anesthetic technique for cesarean delivery remains spinal anesthesia, while chronic pain treatments include spinal cord stimulators, epidural injections, and intrathecal drug delivery systems. The rarest but most feared complication of these techniques is injury to the spinal cord via neuraxial abscess or hematoma, but possible other complications include medication errors, meningitis, and even direct nerve injury. The primary aim of this study was to identify possible preventable causes of hematoma and abscess, meningitis, and other serious adverse outcomes following neuraxial procedures by analyzing claims databases in two countries: The Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database in the USA, and the Netherlands’ two largest medical insurance companies’ databases.

A Systematic Review Evaluating Neuraxial Morphine and Diamorphine-Associated Respiratory Depression After Cesarean Delivery

The prevalence of neuraxial opioid-induced clinically significant respiratory depression (CSRD) after cesarean delivery is unknown. We sought to review reported cases of author-reported respiratory depression (ARD) to calculate CSRD prevalence. A 6-database literature search was performed to identify ARD secondary to neuraxial morphine or diamorphine, in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery. "Highest" (definite and probable/possible) and "lowest" (definite) prevalences of CSRD were calculated. Secondary outcomes included: (1) prevalence of CSRD associated with contemporary doses of neuraxial opioid, (2) prevalence of ARD as defined by each study's own criteria, (3) case reports of ARD, and (4) reports of ARD reported by the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database between 1990 and 2016. We identified 78 articles with 18,455 parturients receiving neuraxial morphine or diamorphine for cesarean delivery. The highest and lowest prevalences of CSRD with all doses of neuraxial opioids were 8.67 per 10,000 (95% CI, 4.20-15.16) and 5.96 per 10,000 (95% CI, 2.23-11.28), respectively. The highest and lowest prevalences of CSRD with the use of clinically relevant doses of neuraxial morphine ranged between 1.63 per 10,000 (95% CI, 0.62-8.77) and 1.08 per 10,000 (95% CI, 0.24-7.22), respectively. The prevalence of ARD as defined by each individual paper was 61 per 10,000 (95% CI, 51-74). One published case report of ARD met our inclusion criteria, and there were no cases of ARD from the Closed Claims database analysis. These results indicate that the prevalence of CSRD due to neuraxial morphine or diamorphine in the obstetric population is low.

Perioperative Peripheral Nerve Injury After General Anesthesia: A Qualitative Systematic Review.

Perioperative peripheral nerve injury (PNI) is a well-recognized complication of general anesthesia that continues to result in patient disability and malpractice claims. However, the multifactorial etiology of PNI is often not appreciated in malpractice claims given that most PNI is alleged to be due to errors in patient positioning. New advances in monitoring may aid anesthesiologists in the early detection of PNI. This article reviews recent studies of perioperative PNI after general anesthesia and discusses the epidemiology and potential mechanisms of injury and preventive measures. We performed a systematic literature search, reviewed the available evidence, and identified areas for further investigation. We also reviewed perioperative PNI in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database for adverse events from 1990 to 2013. The incidence of perioperative PNI after general anesthesia varies considerably depending on the type of surgical procedure, the age and risk factors of the patient population, and whether the detection was made retrospectively or prospectively. Taken together, studies suggest that the incidence in a general population of surgical patients undergoing all types of procedures is <1%, with higher incidence in cardiac, neurosurgery, and some orthopedic procedures. PNI represent 12% of general anesthesia malpractice claims since 1990, with injuries to the brachial plexus and ulnar nerves representing two-thirds of PNI claims. The causes of perioperative PNI after general anesthesia are likely multifactorial, resulting in a "difficult to predict and prevent" phenomenon. Nearly half of the PNI closed claims did not have an obvious etiology, and most (91%) were associated with appropriate anesthetic care. Future studies should focus on the interaction between different mechanisms of insult, severity and duration of injury, and underlying neuronal reserves. Recent automated detection technology in neuromonitoring with somatosensory evoked potentials may increase the ability to identify at-risk patients and individualize patient management.

Injury and Liability Associated With Spine Surgery.

Although spine surgery is associated with significant morbidity, the anesthesia liability profile for spine surgery is not known. We examined claims for spine procedures in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database to evaluate patterns of injury and liability. A retrospective cohort study was performed. Inclusion criteria were anesthesia claims provided for surgical procedures in 2000 to 2014. We compared mechanisms of injury for cervical spine to thoracic or lumbar spine procedures using χ and the Fisher exact test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with permanent disabling injury in spine surgery claims. The 207 spine procedure (73% thoracic/lumbar; 27% cervical) claims comprised >10% of claims. Permanent disabling injuries to nerves, the spinal cord, and the eyes or visual pathways were more common with spine procedures than in nonspine procedures. Hemorrhage and positioning injuries were more common in thoracic/lumbar spine claims, whereas difficult intubation was more common in cervical spine claims. Multiple logistic regression demonstrated prone positioning (odds ratio=3.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-9.43) and surgical duration of ≥4 hours increased the odds of severe permanent injury in spine claims (odds ratio=2.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-6.72). Anesthesia claims related to spine surgery were associated with severe permanent disability primarily from nerve and eye injuries. Prone positioning and surgical duration of ≥4 hours were associated with permanent disabling injuries. Attention to positioning, resuscitation during blood loss, and reducing length of surgery may reduce these complications.

Frequency and Type of Situational Awareness Errors Contributing to Death and Brain Damage

Situational awareness errors may play an important role in the genesis of patient harm. The authors examined closed anesthesia malpractice claims for death or brain damage to determine the frequency and type of situational awareness errors. Surgical and procedural anesthesia death and brain damage claims in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database were analyzed. Situational awareness error was defined as failure to perceive relevant clinical information, failure to comprehend the meaning of available information, or failure to project, anticipate, or plan. Patient and case characteristics, primary damaging events, and anesthesia payments in claims with situational awareness errors were compared to other death and brain damage claims from 2002 to 2013. Anesthesiologist situational awareness errors contributed to death or brain damage in 198 of 266 claims (74%). Respiratory system damaging events were more common in claims with situational awareness errors (56%) than other claims (21%, P < 0.001). The most common specific respiratory events in error claims were inadequate oxygenation or ventilation (24%), difficult intubation (11%), and aspiration (10%). Payments were made in 85% of situational awareness error claims compared to 46% in other claims (P = 0.001), with no significant difference in payment size. Among 198 claims with anesthesia situational awareness error, perception errors were most common (42%), whereas comprehension errors (29%) and projection errors (29%) were relatively less common. Situational awareness error definitions were operationalized for reliable application to real-world anesthesia cases. Situational awareness errors may have contributed to catastrophic outcomes in three quarters of recent anesthesia malpractice claims.Situational awareness errors resulting in death or brain damage remain prevalent causes of malpractice claims in the 21st century.

Neuraxial Anesthesia in Obstetric Patients Receiving Thromboprophylaxis With Unfractionated or Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin: A Systematic Review of Spinal Epidural Hematoma.

Venous thromboembolism remains a major source of morbidity and mortality in obstetrics with an incidence of 29.8/100,000 vaginal delivery hospitalizations; cesarean delivery confers a 4-fold increased risk of thromboembolism when compared with vaginal delivery. Revised national guidelines now stipulate that the majority of women delivering via cesarean and women at risk for ante- or postpartum venous thromboembolism receive mechanical or pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. This practice change has important implications for obstetric anesthesiologists concerned about the risk of spinal epidural hematoma (SEH) among anticoagulated women receiving neuraxial anesthesia. We conducted a systematic review of published English language studies (1952-2016) and of the US Anesthesia Closed Claims Project Database (1990-2013) to identify cases of SEH associated with neuraxial anesthesia and thromboprophylaxis. We also report on SEH in obstetric patients receiving thromboprophylaxis and neuraxial anesthesia without adherence to the American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) recommendations. In our review, we initially identified 736 publications of which 10 met inclusion criteria; these were combined with the 5 cases of SEH identified in 546 obstetric Anesthesia Closed Claims reviews. None of these publications revealed SEH associated with neuraxial anesthesia and thromboprophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin in obstetric patients. Based on data from 6 reports, 28 parturients had their neuraxial blockade before the minimum ASRA recommended time interval between the last anticoagulant dose and the neuraxial procedure. Based on data from 2 reports, 52 parturients received neuraxial anesthesia without their low-molecular-weight heparin dose being discontinued during the intrapartum period. Although the very low level of evidence and high heterogeneity in these reports make it difficult to draw quantitative conclusions from this systematic review, it is encouraging that this comprehensive search did not identify a single case of SEH in an obstetric patient receiving thromboprophylaxis and neuraxial anesthesia. Analysis of large-scale registries (eg, the Anesthesia Incident Reporting System of the Anesthesia Quality Institute) with more granular clinical and pharmacological data is needed to assess the impact of these practice changes on obstetric SEH incidence. In the interim, optimal care of obstetric patients depends on multidisciplinary planning of anticoagulation dosing to facilitate neuraxial anesthesia and thoughtful weighing of the relative risks and benefits of providing versus withholding neuraxial in favor of general anesthesia.

Obstetric Anesthesia Liability Concerns.

Obstetric practice carries a high risk of medical liability and involves both obstetricians and anesthesiologists. Analysis of data from the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database shows an increase in the proportion of anesthesia claims for maternal death and brain damage between the 1990s and 2000 and later, primarily due to hemorrhage. The proportion of claims for newborn brain damage remained unchanged while those for maternal nerve injury and minor injuries decreased. Use of massive transfusion protocols and clinical drills have been shown to improve outcomes from hemorrhage. Good communication and teamwork are critical for reducing obstetric liability.

What Adverse Events and Injuries Are Cited in Anesthesia Malpractice Claims for Nonspine Orthopaedic Surgery?

Malpractice claims that arise during the perioperative care of patients receiving orthopaedic procedures will frequently involve both orthopaedic surgeons and anesthesiologists. The Anesthesia Closed Claims database contains anesthesia malpractice claim data that can be used to investigate patient safety events arising during the care of orthopaedic patients and can provide insight into the medicolegal liability shared by the two specialties. (1) How do orthopaedic anesthetic malpractice claims differ from other anesthesia claims with regard to patient and case characteristics, common events and injuries, and liability profile? (2) What are the characteristics of patients who had neuraxial hematomas after spinal and epidural anesthesia for orthopaedic procedures? (3) What are the characteristics of patients who had orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims for central ischemic neurologic injury occurring during shoulder surgery in the beach chair position? (4) What are the characteristics of patients who had malpractice claims for respiratory depression and respiratory arrests in the postoperative period? The Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database was the source of data for this study. This national database derives data from a panel of liability companies (national and regional) and includes closed malpractice claims against anesthesiologists representing > 30% of practicing anesthesiologists in the United States from all types of practice settings (hospital, surgery centers, and offices). Claims for damage to teeth or dentures are not included in the database. Patient characteristics, type of anesthesia, damaging events, outcomes, and liability characteristics of anesthesia malpractice claims for events occurring in the years 2000 to 2013 related to nonspine orthopaedic surgery (n = 475) were compared with claims related to other procedures (n = 1592) with p < 0.05 as the criterion for statistical significance and two-tailed tests. Odds ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all comparisons. Three types of claims involving high-impact injuries in patients undergoing nonspine orthopaedic surgery were identified through database query for in-depth descriptive review: neuraxial hematoma (n = 10), central ischemic neurologic injury in the beach chair position (n = 9), and injuries caused by postoperative respiratory depression (n = 23). Nonspine orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims were more frequently associated with nerve injuries (125 of 475 [26%], odds ratio [OR] 2.12 [1.66-2.71]) and events arising from the use of regional anesthesia (125 of 475 [26%], OR 6.18 (4.59-8.32) than in malpractice claims in other areas of anesthesia malpractice (230 of 1592 [14%] and 87 of 1592 [6%], respectively, p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Ninety percent (nine of 10) of patients with claims for neuraxial hematomas were receiving anticoagulant medication and all had severe long-term injuries, most with a history of significant delay in diagnosis and treatment after first appearance of signs and symptoms. Central ischemic injuries occurring during orthopaedic surgery in the beach chair position did not occur solely in patients who would have been considered at high risk for ischemic stroke. Patients with malpractice claims for injuries resulting from postoperative respiratory depression events had undergone lower extremity procedures (20 of 23 [87%]) and most events (22 of 23 [96%]) occurred on the day of surgery or the first postoperative day. Nonspine orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims more frequently cited nerve injury and events arising from the use of regional anesthesia than other surgical anesthesia malpractice claims. This may reflect the frequency of regional anesthesia in orthopaedic cases rather than increased risk of injury associated with regional techniques. When neuraxial procedures and anticoagulation regimens are used concurrently, care pathways should emphasize clear lines of responsibility for coordination of care and early investigation of any unusual neurologic findings that might indicate neuraxial hematoma. We do not have a good understanding of the factors that render some patients vulnerable to the rare occurrence of intraoperative central ischemic injury in the beach chair position, but providers should carefully calculate cerebral perfusion pressure relative to measured blood pressure for patients in the upright position. Postoperative use of multiple opioids by different concurrent modes of administration warrant special precautions with consideration given to the provision of care in settings with enhanced respiratory monitoring. The limitations of retrospective closed claims database review prevent conclusions regarding causation. Nonetheless, the collection of relatively rare events with substantial clinical detail provides valuable data to generate hypotheses about causation with potential for future study to improve patient safety. Level III, therapeutic study.

Injury and Liability Associated with Implantable Devices for Chronic Pain.

Due to an increase in implantable device-related anesthesia pain medicine claims, the authors investigated anesthesia liability associated with these devices. After institutional review board approval, the authors identified 148 pain medicine device claims from 1990 or later in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project Database. Device-related damaging events included medication administration events, infections, hematomas, retained catheter fragments, cerebrospinal fluid leaks, cord or cauda equina trauma, device placed at wrong level, stimulator incorrectly programmed, delay in recognition of granuloma formation, and other issues. The most common devices were implantable drug delivery systems (IDDS; 64%) and spinal cord stimulators (29%). Device-related care consisted of surgical device procedures (n = 107) and IDDS maintenance (n = 41). Severity of injury was greater in IDDS maintenance claims (56% death or severe permanent injury) than in surgical device procedures (26%, P < 0.001). Death and brain damage in IDDS maintenance claims resulted from medication administration errors (n = 13; 32%); spinal cord injury resulted from delayed recognition of granuloma formation (n = 9; 22%). The most common damaging events for surgical device procedures were infections, inadequate pain relief, cord trauma, retained catheter fragments, and subcutaneous hygroma. Care was more commonly assessed as less than appropriate (78%) and payments more common (63%) in IDDS maintenance than in surgical device procedure claims (P < 0.001). Half of IDDS maintenance claims were associated with death or permanent severe injury, most commonly from medication errors or failure to recognize progressive neurologic deterioration. Practitioners implanting or managing devices for chronic pain should exercise caution in these areas to minimize patient harm.

Trends in Pain Medicine Liability.

The authors examined changes in the frequency of pain medicine malpractice claims and associated treatment modalities and outcomes over time. The authors analyzed trends in pain medicine claims from 1980 to 2012 in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database by binary logistic regression on year of event. Pain procedures in claims from 2000 to 2012 were compared with the proportion of pain procedures reported to the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry in 2010-2014. Malpractice claims for pain medicine increased from 3% of 2,966 total malpractice claims in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database in 1980-1989 to 18% of 2,743 anesthesia claims in 2000-2012 (odds ratio [OR], 1.088 per year; 95% CI, 1.078 to 1.098; P < 0.001). Outcomes in pain claims became more severe over time, with increases in death and permanent disabling injury (OR, 1.094 per year; P < 0.001). Nonneurolytic cervical injections increased to 27% of pain claims in 2000-2012 (OR, 1.054; P < 0.001), whereas National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry demonstrates that lumbar injections are a more common procedure. Claims associated with medication management increased to 17% of pain claims in 2000-2012 (OR, 1.116 per year; P < 0.001). Pain medicine claims have increased over time and have increased in severity. Claims related to cervical procedures were out of proportion to the frequency with which they are performed. These liability findings suggest that pain specialists should aggressively continue the search for safer and more effective therapies.

Postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression: a closed claims analysis.

Postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression (RD) is a significant cause of death and brain damage in the perioperative period. The authors examined anesthesia closed malpractice claims associated with RD to determine whether patterns of injuries could guide preventative strategies. From the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database of 9,799 claims, three authors reviewed 357 acute pain claims that occurred between 1990 and 2009 for the likelihood of RD using literature-based criteria. Previously cited patient risk factors for RD, clinical management, nursing assessments, and timing of events were abstracted from claim narratives to identify recurrent patterns. RD was judged as possible, probable, or definite in 92 claims (κ = 0.690) of which 77% resulted in severe brain damage or death. The vast majority of RD events (88%) occurred within 24 h of surgery, and 97% were judged as preventable with better monitoring and response. Contributing and potentially actionable factors included multiple prescribers (33%), concurrent administration of nonopioid sedating medications (34%), and inadequate nursing assessments or response (31%). The time between the last nursing check and the discovery of a patient with RD was within 2 h in 42% and within 15 min in 16% of claims. Somnolence was noted in 62% of patients before the event. This claims review supports a growing consensus that opioid-related adverse events are multifactorial and potentially preventable with improvements in assessment of sedation level, monitoring of oxygenation and ventilation, and early response and intervention, particularly within the first 24 h postoperatively.

Patient Injuries From Anesthesia Gas Delivery Equipment

Mehta, Sonya P.*; Eisenkraft, James B.†; Posner, Karen L.*; Domino, Karen B.*‡ Author Information

Patient Injuries from Anesthesia Gas Delivery Equipment

Improvements in anesthesia gas delivery equipment and provider training may increase patient safety. The authors analyzed patient injuries related to gas delivery equipment claims from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project database over the decades from 1970s to the 2000s. After the Institutional Review Board approval, the authors reviewed the Closed Claims Project database of 9,806 total claims. Inclusion criteria were general anesthesia for surgical or obstetric anesthesia care (n = 6,022). Anesthesia gas delivery equipment was defined as any device used to convey gas to or from (but not involving) the airway management device. Claims related to anesthesia gas delivery equipment were compared between time periods by chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Anesthesia gas delivery claims decreased over the decades (P < 0.001) to 1% of claims in the 2000s. Outcomes in claims from 1990 to 2011 (n = 40) were less severe, with a greater proportion of awareness (n = 9, 23%; P = 0.003) and pneumothorax (n = 7, 18%; P = 0.047). Severe injuries (death/permanent brain damage) occurred in supplemental oxygen supply events outside the operating room, breathing circuit events, or ventilator mishaps. The majority (85%) of claims involved provider error with (n = 7) or without (n = 27) equipment failure. Thirty-five percent of claims were judged as preventable by preanesthesia machine check. Gas delivery equipment claims in the Closed Claims Project database decreased in 1990-2011 compared with earlier decades. Provider error contributed to severe injury, especially with inadequate alarms, improvised oxygen delivery systems, and misdiagnosis or treatment of breathing circuit events.

Vascular Complications of Central Venous Catheter Placement: Evidence-Based Methods for Prevention and Treatment

PRACTITIONERS, MANUFACTURERS, AND REGULATORY AGENCIES have long regarded central venous catheters (CVCs) as relatively dangerous, problem-prone devices. Recent attention has been focused primarily on reduction of infectious complications of CVCs. Application of strict aseptic precautions (the so-called “central-line bundle”) when placing CVCs effectively has reduced the incidence of catheter-related infection, 1 Hewlett A.L. Rupp M.E. New developments in the prevention of intravascular catheter associated infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2012; 26: 1-11 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (22) Google Scholar and Medicare no longer reimburses for costs related to these infections. 2 Hoff T.J. Soerensen C. No payment for preventable complications: Reviewing the early literature for content, guidance, and impressions. Qual Manag Health Care. 2011; 20: 62-75 Crossref PubMed Scopus (11) Google Scholar However, mechanical complications of central venous cannulation remain a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Data from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project database have suggested that since 1990, the majority of mechanical complications associated with CVCs are vascular injuries, 3 Domino K.B. Bowdle T.A. Posner K.L. et al. Injuries and liability related to central vascular catheters: A closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2004; 100: 1411-1418 Crossref PubMed Scopus (204) Google Scholar and “accidental puncture or laceration” is a reportable National Quality Measures Patient Safety Indicator. 4 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ): National Quality Measures C. Accidental puncture or laceration (provider-level): Rate per 1,000 discharges. Available at: http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/content.aspx?id=38525. Accessed March 21, 2013 Google Scholar Fortunately, most vascular injuries from CVCs should be preventable

Similar Liability for Trauma and Nontrauma Surgical Anesthesia

Trauma care has many challenges, including the perception by nonanesthesia physicians of increased medical malpractice liability. We used the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims Project database and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to compare the rate of claims for trauma anesthesia care to national trauma surgery data. We also used the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims Project database to evaluate injury and liability profiles of trauma anesthesia malpractice claims compared to nontrauma surgical anesthesia claims. Surgical anesthesia claims for injuries that occurred between 1980 and 2005 in the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims Project database of 8954 claims were included in this analysis. Trauma was defined using cause of injury criteria in state trauma registries, including out-of-hospital falls. To estimate national trauma anesthesia rates, we used injury codes in NIS reports to define trauma discharges and NIS discharges with surgical procedure codes for the denominator. The year-adjusted odds ratio and P value comparing the national trauma anesthesia injury rates and American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims Project inpatient claim rates in the 1990 to 2001 time period were calculated by a multivariate logistic regression of the injury/trauma outcome on year and the NIS/Closed Claims Project indicator. Payments in claim resolution between trauma claims and nontraumatic surgical anesthesia claims were compared by χ(2) analysis, Fisher exact test for proportions, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for payment amounts. Trauma claims represented 6% of the total 6215 surgical anesthesia claims in the study period. The inpatient trauma claims rates were consistently lower than the NIS injury rates for 1990 to 2001. The year-adjusted odds ratio comparing the trauma claims rates to the NIS injury rates was 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.72; P < 0.001, likelihood ratio test). Trauma claims and nontrauma surgical anesthesia claims did not differ in appropriateness of care, whether or not a payment was made to the plaintiff, or size of payments. Despite reported perceptions that trauma care involves a high risk of medical liability, there was no apparent increased risk of liability among inpatients presenting for trauma anesthesia care. The proportion in malpractice claims in trauma anesthesia care was not increased compared to nontraumatic surgical anesthesia care. With respect to medicolegal liability, these results support participation of anesthesia providers in multidisciplinary trauma care and organized systems.

Autopsy Utilization in Medicolegal Defense of Anesthesiologists

The rate of autopsy in hospital deaths has declined from more than 50% to 2.4% over the past 50 yr. To understand the role of autopsies in anesthesia malpractice claims, we examined 980 closed claims for deaths that occurred in 1990 or later in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project Database. Deaths with autopsy were compared with deaths without autopsy. Deaths with autopsy were evaluated to answer the following four questions: Did autopsy findings establish a cause of death? Did autopsy provide new information? Did autopsy identify a significant nonanesthetic contribution to death? Did autopsy help or hurt the defense of the anesthesiologist? Reliability was assessed by κ scores. Differences between groups were compared with chi-square analysis and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with P < 0.05 for statistical significance. Autopsies were performed in 551 (56%) of 980 claims for death. Evaluable autopsy information was available in 288 (52%) of 551 claims with autopsy. Patients in these 288 claims were younger and healthier than those in claims for death without autopsy (P < 0.01). Autopsy provided pathologic diagnoses and an unequivocal cause of death in 21% of these 288 claims (κ= 0.71). An unexpected pathologic diagnosis was found in 50% of claims with evaluable autopsy information (κ = 0.59). Autopsy identified a significant nonanesthetic contribution in 61% (κ = 0.64) of these 288 claims. Autopsy helped in the defense of the anesthesiologist in 55% of claims and harmed the defense in 27% (κ = 0.58) of claims with evaluable autopsy information. Autopsy findings were more often helpful than harmful in the medicolegal defense of anesthesiologists. Autopsy identified a significant nonanesthetic contribution to death in two thirds of claims with evaluable autopsy information.

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project

Administrative Databases: Are They Useful for Clinical Analyses?

To the Editor:— We are pleased that Rosero et al. 1pursued a study of the epidemiology of malignant hyperthermia (MH). We agree with Rosero et al. that reporting to the North American Malignant Hyperthermia Registry may underestimate MH mortality. From the Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States Hotline and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project database we are aware of deaths clearly due to MH that were not reported to the Registry. Reports to the North American Malignant Hyperthermia Registry are voluntary, but provide key details that administrative databases cannot.2†We encourage readers to report suspected MH episodes to the Registry, using forms that are available online at www.mhreg.org.Rosero et al. define MH cases by the hospital discharge diagnosis code of malignant hyperthermia as a result of anesthetics, after excluding other conditions associated with hyperthermia. Did the authors attempt to confirm that the 2,312 MH cases not admitted from another health facility had been exposed to an anesthetic, for example by linking them to surgical or procedural International Classification of Disease, ninth revision (ICD-9) codes? The diagnosis of MH would be more certain if there was some evidence of anesthetic exposure, not just a code.Like any database, the “output” depends on the accuracy of the data entered. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample depends on accurate coding by medical records departments, which in turn are dependent on clinical documentation. The diagnosis of MH requires no supporting evidence to be coded as such. Other studies have shown that incorrect coding and diagnostic inaccuracy can undermine calculations derived from administrative databases.3,4Rosero et al. conclude that the incidence of MH increased from 2000 to 2005. An equally plausible explanation is reporting bias: As coders became aware of the new ICD-9 code for MH, they used it more often. This code (995.86) was approved in 1997, thanks to the efforts of the Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States and American Society of Anesthesiologists, and coders may have been unaware of its existence, given the rarity of MH.Finally, we point out an error in Rosero et al. 's paper. The 2007 review by Rosenberg et al. 5did not consider our 2008 report of an MH-associated mortality rate of 1.4% to be “controversial.”2Their review was published almost a year before our paper, making it impossible to cite.*The North American Malignant Hyperthermia Registry of the Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States, and Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania. mlarach@gmail.com