• Ann R Coll Surg Engl · Jan 2017

    Review

    Hip fracture litigation: A 10-year review of NHS Litigation Authority data and the effect of national guidelines.

    • R Fanous, S Sabharwal, A Altaie, C M Gupte, and P Reilly.
    • Department of Trauma Orthopaedics, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust , London, W2 1NY , UK.
    • Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2017 Jan 1; 99 (1): 17-21.

    AbstractWe present a review evaluating all litigation claims relating to hip fractures made in a 10-year period between 2005 and 2015. Data was obtained from the NHS Litigation Authority through a freedom of information request. All claims relating to hip fractures were reviewed. During the period analysed, 216 claims were made, of which 148 were successful (69%). The total cost of settling these claims was in excess of £5 million. The introduction of a best-practice tariff by the Department of Health in 2010 was designed to improve the quality of care for hip fracture patients. This was followed by guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2011 and the British Orthopaedic Association in 2012. We analysed claims submitted before and after these guidelines were introduced and no significant difference in the number of claims was noted. The most common cause for litigation was a delay in diagnosis, which accounted for 86 claims in total (40%). Despite the presence of these guidelines and targets, there has not been a significant reduction in the number of claims or an improvement in diagnostic accuracy. This may be due to an increasing level of litigation in the UK but we must also question whether we are indeed providing best-practice care to our hip fracture patients and whether these guidelines need further review.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…