• Brian K Ross.
• Department of Anesthesiology, University of Washington, Box 356540, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. bkross@u.washington.edu
• Anesthesiol Clin North America. 2003 Mar 1;21(1):183-97.

AbstractWhat have we learned so far from the Closed Claims database? For the most part, analysis of the claims made supports the generally held beliefs about the medico-legal risk of obstetrical anesthesia. However, the obstetric files do reveal a risk profile that differs significantly from the nonobstetric files. One of the most surprising observations was the large proportion of relatively "minor" injuries in the obstetric files in contrast to the nonobstetric files. These claims may simply be the result of an increased incidence of such problems in obstetric patients. However, careful review of statements made in the files revealed that a substantial number of patients were unhappy with the care provided and felt themselves ignored and mistreated. Meyers has suggested that malpractice litigation serves the purpose not only of reparation of injury for substandard care but also one of emotional vindication [19]. Not unexpectedly, anesthesiologists are frequently named in claims involving bad fetal outcomes. Most of these claims, for whatever reason, do not result in payments to the litigant. Problems involving airway management, focusing on difficult intubation and pulmonary aspiration, are unfortunately well represented in the obstetrical files. There is no clear indication that this is changing. One of the principle causes of major adverse outcomes with regional anesthesia is local anesthetic toxicity. There is evidence that the frequency of these claims is on the decline. Nerve injury as a result of direct neural trauma continues to appear at regular intervals in the claims files. It is clear from review of the ASA Closed Claim database that there are many unrecognized factors, separate from major injuries, that must be important motivating factors in patients who bring claims against anesthesiologists. A lawsuit does not necessarily signify injury. It has been suggested that the number of patients harmed by negligent care who actually file a claim may be less than 2% [12]. In contrast, lawsuits are usually not filed unless people perceive that they or a family member have been wronged by the system. Anesthesia care providers should give attention to conducting themselves in such a manner that patients will not be motivated to bring suit for an unexpected outcome [20]. Therefore, merely focusing one's attention on reducing the potential for major injuries may have little effect on solving the medico-legal dilemma in obstetrical anesthesia. The uniqueness of the ASA Closed Claims database is that it reflects the consumer's perspective. This point can not be emphasized enough because one of the best measures of quality of care comes from the patient's perspective. What can help? Careful personal conduct Establish good rapport Involvement in prenatal education Early pre-anesthetic evaluation Provide realistic expectation Regularly review potential major and minor risks.

12 keywords...

hide…