Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34464556›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2021

Malpractice litigation and spinal surgery in the National Health Service: a single tertiary-level centre perspective over 12 years.

N A Quraishi, A Shetaiwi, D D'Aquino, K Salem

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Surgical malpractice - the barrister's perspective.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2021
    Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N A QuraishiNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
A ShetaiwiNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
D D'AquinoNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
K SalemNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMedical malpractice litigation is a major concern for all spine surgeons. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence and burden of successful litigation relating to the management of spinal disorders over 12 years within a UK NHS tertiary-level spinal unit and compare these litigation costs with those of other specialties.

methodsWe obtained all data held by our claims department from its inception in January 2008 to December 2019. We also obtained costs for the total financial burden incurred by our Trust during this period.

resultsIn total, there were 83 closed claims involving spinal pathologies. Over 80% of these comprised negligent surgery ( DISCUSSION: Fewer than 30% of initial claims against a tertiary spinal surgical referral unit resulted in a successful financial outcome for the claimant. The total costs incurred were just over £8 million, with one-third apportioned to high legal costs, reflecting the complexity of resolving spinal litigation. Our entire legal expenses accounted for only 2% of the total legal bill paid by our hospital over a 12-year period.

Indexed as

HumansMalpracticeNeurosurgical ProceduresSpinal DiseasesState MedicineUnited KingdomClaimsLegal costsSpinal litigationSpine

Identifiers

PMID34464556
PMCPMC10335182
OpenAlexW3196838724

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.