Closed Claims Research Articles

Awareness during anesthesia: a closed claims analysis.

Awareness during general anesthesia is a frightening experience, which may result in serious emotional injury and post-traumatic stress disorder. We performed an in-depth analysis of cases from the database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project to explore the contribution of intraoperative awareness to professional liability in anesthesia. The database of the Closed Claims Project is composed of closed US malpractice claims that have been collected in a standardized manner. All claims for intraoperative awareness were reviewed by the reviewers to identify patterns of causation and standard of care. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent patient and anesthetic factors associated with claims for recall during general anesthesia compared to other general anesthesia malpractice claims. Awareness claims accounted for 79 (1.9%) of 4,183 claims in the database, including 18 claims for awake paralysis, i.e., the inadvertent paralysis of an awake patient, and 61 claims for recall during general anesthesia, ie., recall of events while receiving general anesthesia. The majority of awareness claims involved women (77%), younger than 60 yr of age (89%), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical class I-II (68%), who underwent elective surgery (87%). Most (94%) claims for awake paralysis represented substandard care involving errors in labeling and administration, whereas care was substandard in only 43% of the claims for recall during general anesthesia (P < 0.001). Claims for recall during general anesthesia were more likely to involve women (odds ratio [OR] = 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.58, 6.06) and anesthetic techniques using intraoperative opioids (OR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.20, 3.74), intraoperative muscle relaxants (OR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.22, 4.25), and no volatile anesthetic (OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.88, 5.46). Deficiencies in labeling and vigilance were common causes for awake paralysis. Claims for recall during general anesthesia were more likely in women and with nitrous-narcotic-relaxant techniques.

Adverse Anesthetic Outcomes Arising from Gas Delivery Equipment

Anesthesia gas delivery equipment is a potentially important source of patient injury. To better define the contribution of gas delivery equipment to professional liability in anesthesia, the authors conducted an in-depth analysis of cases from the database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project. The database of the Closed Claims Project is composed of closed US malpractice claims that have been collected in a standardized manner. All claims resulting from the use of gas delivery equipment were reviewed for recurrent patterns of injury. Gas delivery equipment was associated with 72 (2%) of 3,791 claims in the database. Death and permanent brain damage accounted for almost all adverse outcomes (n = 55, 76%). Equipment misuse was defined as fault or human error associated with the preparation, maintenance, or deployment of a medical device. Equipment failure was defined as unexpected malfunction of a medical device, despite routine maintenance and previous uneventful use. Misuse of equipment (n = 54, 75%) was three times more common than equipment failure (n = 17, 24%). Misconnects and disconnects of the breathing circuit made the largest contribution to injury (n = 25, 35%). Reviewers judged that 38 of 72 claims (53%) could have been prevented by pulse oximetry, capnography, or a combination of these two monitors. Overall, 56 of 72 gas delivery claims (78%) were deemed preventable with the use or better use of monitors. The year of occurrence for claims involving gas delivery equipment ranged from 1962 to 1991 and did not differ significantly from claims involving other adverse respiratory events. Claims associated with gas delivery equipment are infrequent but severe and continue to occur in the 1990s. Educational and preventive strategies that focus on equipment misuse and breathing circuit configuration may have the greatest potential for enhancing the safety of anesthesia gas delivery equipment.

Learning and memory during general anesthesia: an update.

Learning and memory during general anesthesia: an update.

Adverse Respiratory Events Infrequently Leading to Malpractice Suits A Closed Claims Analysis

Adverse outcomes associated with respiratory events are the single largest class of injury in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project (762 of the 2,046 cases, 37%). Inadequate ventilation, esophageal intubation, and difficult tracheal intubation are the most common mechanisms of respiratory-related adverse outcomes. An analysis of closed claims data regarding these mechanisms has been reported previously. This report is concerned with 300 claims for five other less common but important categories of respiratory-related adverse outcomes in which recurrent themes of management error or patterns of injury could be identified: airway trauma, pneumothorax, airway obstruction, aspiration, and bronchospasm. Airway trauma (97 claims, 5% of the database) was associated with difficult intubation in 41 (42%) of the cases and the most frequent sites of injury were the larynx, pharynx, and esophagus. Pneumothorax (67 cases, 3% of the database) was usually either needle-related (block or central vascular catheter placement) or airway management-related (instrumentation or barotrauma). Airway obstruction (56 claims, 3% of the database) occurred in the upper airway in 39 (70%) of the cases. Aspiration (56 claims, 3% of the database) usually occurred during general anesthesia, either during induction prior to tracheal intubation or during maintenance of anesthesia delivered via mask. Bronchospasm (40 claims, 2% of the database) tended to occur during induction of general anesthesia in patients with a history of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and/or smoking. The incidence of severe injury (brain damage and death) among these cases in the five categories was 47% overall, ranging from 12% in airway trauma claims to nearly 90% in claims for airway obstruction and bronchospasm.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Nerve Injury Associated with Anesthesia

The authors examined the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Study database to define the role of nerve damage in the overall spectrum of anesthesia-related injury that leads to litigation. Of 1,541 claims reviewed, 227 (15%) were for anesthesia-related nerve injury. Ulnar neuropathy represented one-third of all nerve injuries and was the most frequent nerve injury. Less-frequent sites of nerve injury were the brachial plexus (23%) and the lumbosacral nerve roots (16%). In a large proportion of cases, the exact mechanism of injury was unclear despite evidence of intensive investigation in the claim files. Median payment for nerve damage claims involving disabling injury was $56,000, which was significantly lower than the $225,000 median payment for claims for disabling injury not involving nerve damage (P less than 0.01). The closed claims reviewers judged that the standard of care had been met significantly more often in claims involving nerve damage than in claims not involving nerve damage. The authors conclude that nerve damage is a significant source of anesthesia-related claims but that the exact mechanism of nerve injury is often unclear. In particular, ulnar nerve injuries seemed to occur without identifiable mechanism.

Adverse Respiratory Events in Anesthesia: A Closed Claims Analysis

Adverse outcomes associated with respiratory events constitute the single largest class of injury in the American Society of Anesthesiology Closed Claims Study (522 of 1541 cases; 34%). Death or brain damage occurred in 85% of cases. The median cost of settlement or jury award was +200,000. Most outcomes (72%) were considered preventable with better monitoring. Three mechanisms of injury accounted for three-fourths of the adverse respiratory events: inadequate ventilation (196; 38%), esophageal intubation (94; 18%), and difficult tracheal intubation (87; 17%). Inadequate ventilation was used to describe claims in which it was evident that insufficient gas exchange had produced the adverse outcome, but it was not possible to identify the exact cause. This group was characterized by the highest proportion of cases in which care was considered substandard (90%). The esophageal intubation group was notable for a recurring diagnostic failure: in 48% of cases where auscultation of breath sounds was performed and documented, this test led to the erroneous conclusion that the endotracheal tube was correctly located in the trachea. Claims for difficult tracheal intubation were distinguished by a comparatively small proportion of cases (36%) in which the outcome was considered preventable with better monitoring. A better understanding of respiratory risks may require investigative protocols that initiate data collection immediately upon the recognition of a critical incident or adverse outcome.

Investigation of obstetric malpractice closed claims: profile of event.

The files of 220 obstetric closed-claim cases were reviewed by five obstetricians to determine whether information could be collected an analyzed to identify common predisposing factors to claims and to suggest preventative measures. The data suggests these cases contain common easily identified obstetric risk factors, most of which occurred in labor and delivery (66%). Fifty-four percent of the risks were recognized, 32% correctly managed, and a high percentage of risks were considered by the reviewers to be directly related to the obstetric outcome leading to the claim (66%). The authors feel obstetric closed claims can be studied and suggestions made to aid obstetricians in providing care. Identification of common obstetric risks and correct management of these risks is poor in these cases. Recognition and management guidelines are imperative in ensuring good obstetric outcome. These two physician-controlled factors played important parts in the majority of cases reviewed. It would appear from this study that obstetric malpractice closed claims are amenable to study; physicians and their patients would benefit from better data collection systems to identify risks in individual pregnancies; physicians need readily available resources to aid their management of patients; only through modification of physician behavior can suits be avoided.

Analysis of anesthetic mishaps. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners' closed claim study.

Analysis of anesthetic mishaps. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners' closed claim study.

Drawing Inferences from Medical Malpractice Closed Claim Studies

The in medical malpractice insurance has prompted several studies of medical malpractice claims closed during a specified period. However, the set of all claims brought to final settlement during, say, a year likely will give a distorted picture of the underlying distributions of frequency and severity. In this paper, procedures are developed for adjusting closed claim data for biases caused by the upward trend in claim frequency over time, inflation, and the relationship between size of claim and time to settlement. The problem of describing the revised severity distribution in terms of only a few parameters also is addressed. It is generally agreed that a contributing cause of the current crisis in medical malpractice insurance is the lack of a comprehensive nationwide data base. The three major efforts to collect information on medical malpractice claims and injuries are the 1970 HEW study [3], the 1974 AIA