An Analysis of Medical Malpractice Litigation Involving Orbital Fractures

Author:

Brozynski Martina1,Seyidova Nargiz1,Oleru Olachi1,Rew Curtis2,loschpe Anais Di Via1,Taub Peter J.1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY

2. University of Connecticut School of Law, Hartford, CT

Abstract

Background: Orbital fractures frequently require operative management by a plastic and reconstructive surgeon. Due to the proximity to the globe and complexity of the reconstruction, orbital fractures, and related procedures have the potential to be a source of medical litigation. The aim of the present study was to review orbital fracture malpractice litigation, including case outcomes and compensatory damages. Methods: The Westlaw and Lexis Nexis databases were queried for jury verdicts and settlements related to orbital fracture malpractice lawsuits. The Boolean terms included “orbit! /10 fracture,” “orbit! & fracture,” and “ocular & fracture” for both databases. Cases were included if they were state or federal cases related to both orbital fracture and medical malpractice involving surgical or medical mismanagement or misdiagnosis of orbital fracture. Results: A total of 49 cases from 1994 to 2018 met inclusion criteria between the databases. The most common legal complaint was the defendant’s failure to make a diagnosis either by not ordering the proper radiological tests or by not interpreting radiological tests correctly, seen in 35% of cases. In 57% of the cases, the defendant was a surgeon, 46% of which involved a plastic surgeon specifically. Cases were resolved in favor of the defendant 49% of the time. Most cases (57%) resulted in a monetary outcome of $0. However, cases that were decided in favor of the plaintiff had significant compensatory damages with the majority being over $100,000, and 1 case as high as $8 million. Conclusion: Although almost half of the orbital fracture malpractice cases resulted in an outcome favoring the defendant, significant monetary consequences against the defendant were possible in cases when the plaintiff prevailed.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference13 articles.

1. Malpractice litigation in plastic surgery: can we identify patterns?;Sarmiento;Aesthet Surg J,2020

2. Characterization of medical malpractice litigation after rhinoplasty in the United States;Ong;Aesthet Surg J,2021

3. Sociological and medical factors influence outcomes in facial trauma malpractice;Mozeika;J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2019

4. An analysis of malpractice litigation and expert witnesses in plastic surgery;Therattil;Eplasty,2017

5. A look inside the courtroom: an analysis of 292 cosmetic breast surgery medical malpractice cases;Paik;Aesthet Surg J,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3