[Evaluation of 157 arbitration procedures against maxillofacial surgeons handled by the arbitration office of the North German Medical Associations from 2000 to 2005].

Abstract

Medical work is, just like any other profession, not always without error and even when no mistake has been made the patient may suffer health damages, because such are the unavoidable risks. Arbitration procedures of medical liability disputes can in particular cases resolve the individual conflict between physician and patient. The results of these arbitration procedures can point towards the main focus of diagnosis, patient accusations (patient dissatisfaction) and treatment errors. In the space of 6 years from 2000 until 2005 the North-German arbitration office handled 157 arbitration procedures against Maxillofacial surgeons. The decisions were statistically and casuistically analysed with regard to patient accusations, type of treatment error, frequency of treatment error, health damages that were caused and not caused by errors. Liability claims against a physician result only from those errors that have caused health damages to a patient. Not all errors cause damage automatically. Patient claims were found to be justified in 28% of all procedures and a recommendation for regulation was made to the physician's insurance. Maxillofacial surgery, with reference to the 20.4% of cases analysed, clearly represents less than the total average. The main focus of accusations raised by patients and also the main focus of the observed treatment errors are operative errors as a cause of sensitivity defects of the lower lip and the tongue, also of tongue damages and their associated taste defects. Parallel to the 20.4% of cases, which showed iatrogenic health damages caused by errors, 60.9% of cases showed patients had also suffered iatrogenic damages even though no medical errors had caused them.