Background: Poor clinical outcomes and adverse events following orthopaedic trauma are common, which may lead to litigation. To our knowledge, factors associated with litigation following fracture care have not previously been evaluated.
Methods: A retrospective review of fracture-related malpractice lawsuits from 1988 to 2015 was completed utilizing VerdictSearch (ALM Media Properties), a medicolegal database. Defendant and plaintiff characteristics along with fracture type, allegations, litigation outcomes, and the association of case characteristics with outcomes were analyzed.
Results: A total of 561 cases were evaluated; 360 cases were excluded, resulting in a total of 201 cases that were analyzed in detail. The mean age of the plaintiff was 43.1 years (standard deviation [SD],19.4 years). Twenty-four fracture types were represented among the analyzed cases. The most common fractures were of the radius (44), the femur (32), the tibia (30), the ulna (29), the humerus (26), the spine (24), the hip (17), and the fibula (15). Overall, 129 (64.2%) cases resulted in a defense verdict, 41 (20.4%) cases resulted in a plaintiff verdict, and 31 (15.4%) cases resulted in a settlement. For plaintiff verdicts, the mean indemnity payment was $3,778,657 (median, $753,057; range, $89,943 to $27,926,311). For settlements, the mean indemnity payment was $1,097,439 (median, $547,935; range, $103,541 to $9,445,113). The mean indemnity for plaintiff verdicts was significantly greater than the mean indemnity for settlements (p = 0.03). The presence of a neurological deficit was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of a favorable outcome for the plaintiff (52.8% for plaintiffs with neurological deficit versus 32.1% for plaintiffs without neurological deficit; p = 0.019).
Conclusions: This study examined malpractice litigation following traumatic orthopaedic injuries. In cases with decisions for the plaintiff, indemnity payments were on average more than $2.5 million larger than payments for settlements. In fracture cases with neurological deficit, malpractice cases were more likely to result in a favorable outcome for the plaintiff.