An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigation Involving Mandibular Fractures

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Martina Brozynski, N. Seyidova, Olachi O. Oleru, C. Rew, Nikita Roy, P. Taub
{"title":"An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigation Involving Mandibular Fractures","authors":"Martina Brozynski, N. Seyidova, Olachi O. Oleru, C. Rew, Nikita Roy, P. Taub","doi":"10.1177/27325016231186303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: With an increase in medical litigation, fractures of the mandible are not an uncommon source of legal action. The present study sought to conduct a comprehensive analysis of mandibular fracture malpractice cases. Specifically, the aim was to focus on the reasons a suit is brought, the outcomes, and the compensatory damages of litigation. The information is valuable to physicians as it may serve to minimize the risk of malpractice suits. Methods: The Westlaw and Lexis Nexis databases were searched for jury verdicts and settlements related to mandibular fracture malpractice lawsuits. Cases that did not meet the inclusion criteria, duplicate cases, and those for which enough information was not available were excluded. The data included reasons, outcomes, and monetary outcomes of litigations, as well as defendant specialty, location, year, and plaintiff demographics. Results: A total of 55 included cases spanned between 1970 and 2019. Of these, the most common reason a suit was brought included the defendant’s failure to make the diagnosis, which was noted in 27%. In 71% of the cases, the defendant was a surgeon; with 25% of these cases involving a plastic surgeon. Cases were resolved in favor of the defendant 51% of the time. Regarding outcome, 53% had a monetary outcome of $0. Conclusions: Although a slight majority of cases (51%) resulted in an outcome favoring the defendant, significant monetary consequences against the defendant were possible in cases when the plaintiff prevailed. Since failure to diagnose was the most common reason for a plaintiff to pursue litigation, physicians should thoroughly evaluate patients with suspected mandibular fractures to avoid litigation.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":"25 1","pages":"386 - 396"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27325016231186303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: With an increase in medical litigation, fractures of the mandible are not an uncommon source of legal action. The present study sought to conduct a comprehensive analysis of mandibular fracture malpractice cases. Specifically, the aim was to focus on the reasons a suit is brought, the outcomes, and the compensatory damages of litigation. The information is valuable to physicians as it may serve to minimize the risk of malpractice suits. Methods: The Westlaw and Lexis Nexis databases were searched for jury verdicts and settlements related to mandibular fracture malpractice lawsuits. Cases that did not meet the inclusion criteria, duplicate cases, and those for which enough information was not available were excluded. The data included reasons, outcomes, and monetary outcomes of litigations, as well as defendant specialty, location, year, and plaintiff demographics. Results: A total of 55 included cases spanned between 1970 and 2019. Of these, the most common reason a suit was brought included the defendant’s failure to make the diagnosis, which was noted in 27%. In 71% of the cases, the defendant was a surgeon; with 25% of these cases involving a plastic surgeon. Cases were resolved in favor of the defendant 51% of the time. Regarding outcome, 53% had a monetary outcome of $0. Conclusions: Although a slight majority of cases (51%) resulted in an outcome favoring the defendant, significant monetary consequences against the defendant were possible in cases when the plaintiff prevailed. Since failure to diagnose was the most common reason for a plaintiff to pursue litigation, physicians should thoroughly evaluate patients with suspected mandibular fractures to avoid litigation.
下颌骨骨折医疗事故诉讼分析
背景:随着医疗诉讼的增加,下颌骨骨折已成为法律诉讼的常见来源。本研究旨在对下颌骨骨折的医疗事故进行综合分析。具体来说,目的是关注诉讼的原因、结果和诉讼的赔偿损失。这些信息对医生来说是有价值的,因为它可以最大限度地减少医疗事故诉讼的风险。方法:检索Westlaw和Lexis Nexis数据库中与下颌骨骨折医疗事故诉讼相关的陪审团裁决和和解。不符合纳入标准的病例、重复病例和无法获得足够信息的病例被排除在外。这些数据包括诉讼的原因、结果和金钱结果,以及被告的专业、地点、年份和原告的人口统计数据。结果:共纳入55例病例,时间跨度为1970年至2019年。其中,提起诉讼的最常见原因包括被告未能做出诊断,占27%。在71%的案件中,被告是外科医生;其中25%的病例涉及整形外科医生。在51%的案件中被告胜诉。至于结果,53%的人的货币结果为0美元。结论:虽然大多数案件(51%)的结果有利于被告,但在原告胜诉的情况下,被告可能面临重大的经济后果。由于诊断失败是原告提起诉讼的最常见原因,医生应彻底评估疑似下颌骨折的患者,以避免诉讼。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信