• Ranjit Thomas, Raghav Gupta, Christoph J Griessenauer, Justin M Moore, Nimer Adeeb, Rouzbeh Motiei-Langroudi, Bryan Guidal, Nitin Agarwal, Ron L Alterman, Robert M Friedlander, Christopher S Ogilvy, and Ajith J Thomas.
• Neurosurgical Service, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
• World Neurosurg. 2018 Feb 1; 110: e552-e559.

BackgroundOf all specialists, neurosurgeons have the highest probability of facing a medical malpractice claim. Here we report the first specialty-wide review of malpractice claims in neurosurgery performed using a well-established national online legal database.MethodsThe Westlaw legal research service (Thomson Reuters, Eagan, Minnesota, USA) was queried for jury verdicts and settlements related to neurosurgery and medical malpractice between 1985 and 2015. Case files were examined, and factors recorded included the age and sex of the patient, the state and year in which the verdict was reached, defendant specialties, award payouts, and alleged reasons for malpractice. Case files were sorted into neurosurgical subspecialties based on the nature of the condition and the type of treatment administered.ResultsA total of 516 cases were identified, and 343 cases were analyzed. A defendant's verdict was reached in 165 (48.1%) cases, and a plaintiff's verdict was reached in 93 (27.1%) cases. A settlement was reached in 81 cases (23.6%). The median payout for plaintiff's verdicts was $2,550,000 (range, $80,000-$216,849,187), and that for settlements was $1,300,000 (range, $100,000-$13,300,000). Procedural error (45.5%), a failure to diagnose (41.4%), or a failure to treat (42.9%) were the most commonly cited reasons for litigation. Neurosurgeons accounted for 21.1% of defendants. The median plaintiff award payout was highest for pediatric cases ($10,100,000).ConclusionsA defendant's verdict was reached in nearly one-half of the cases. In instances where a plaintiff's verdict was reached, large payouts were common, especially in pediatric and cerebrovascular cases. An emphasis on reducing procedural error, and making timely differential diagnoses, may reduce future litigation.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…