Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33895879›Full record

Observational studyKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2021

Postoperative pain and infection are the most frequent reasons for legal action after knee arthroscopy: a 5-year review based on two private insurance French companies after arthroscopy.

Grégoire Rougereau, Théo Kavakelis, Frédéric Sailhan, Nicolas Chanzy, Frédéric Zadegan, Tristan Langlais, Didier Ollat

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Grégoire RougereauDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France. greg.rougereau@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1343-0881
Théo KavakelisDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France.
Frédéric SailhanDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, Descartes University, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Nicolas ChanzyM.A.C.S.F Mutuelle d'Assurances du Corps de Santé Français, CR Triangle de l'arche, 10 Rue de Valmy, 92800, Puteaux, France.
Frédéric ZadeganDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France.
Tristan LanglaisDepartment of Orthopedics Pediatrics, Children Hospital Purpan, Toulouse University, Toulouse, France.
Didier OllatDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France.
Institute Mutualiste Montsouris · FRDélégation Paris 5 · FRService de Santé des Armées · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversité Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe objective of this study was to determine the reasons for complaints and describe the judicial means upstream of France's courts following arthroscopy.

methodsThis is a retrospective observational study including all compensation records related to arthroscopic surgery, collected from the two leading French insurance organizations: MACSF and Branchet companies, from 2014 to 2018. Three medical experts performed the protocol and analysis.

resultsFinally, 247 procedures were included. The most common motives were: the appearance or persistence of pain (43.7%), postoperative infection (29.1%), technical errors (10.5%), nerve damage (5.7%), arterial lesions (2.8%), side errors (2.4%). Knee arthroscopies were more at risk of legal action for infection (p = 0.0006), and for disappointing results or persistent pain (p = 0.001). The first recourse was the conciliation and compensation commission (CCI) in 136 cases (55.1%), the civil court (TGI) in 88 cases (35.6%) and amicable settlement in 23 cases (9.3%). The mean time between surgery and the complaint was 32.8 ± 25.7 months, and was shorter in the case of an amicable procedure (p < 0.001). The lawsuit's mean duration was 15.6 ± 11.2 months, but longer in case of civil proceedings (p < 0.0001). The experts found no negligence in 81.8% of cases (n = 202). Infections were the leading cause of recourse to the conciliation and compensation commission (p < 0.0001), while technical errors were the main reason for complaints settled in an amicable procedure (p = 0.035). It was found more proven negligence in case of amicable procedures (p < 0.0001). The mean amount of compensation was 60,968.45€. No significant difference could be found regarding the median values of compensation between the reason of complaint. The amount of compensation was higher in civil court proceedings than in any others (p = 0.02).

conclusionThe main reasons for arthroscopy litigation in France are reported in this study, specifying how they are managed upstream of possible legal proceedings. The knee is the main joint involved. Patient information, close follow-up associated with early and appropriate management of complications are the main ways to reduce complaints. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

InsuranceMalpracticeArthroscopyCompensation and RedressHumansPostoperative PainRetrospective StudiesArthroscopyFranceIndemnityLitigationMalpractice

Identifiers

PMID33895879
OpenAlexW3158672457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.