Search

Study objective To provide a contemporary medicolegal analysis of claims brought against anesthesia providers in the United States related to neuraxial blocks for surgery and obstetrics. Design In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed closed claims data from the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database between 2007 and 2016. Setting Closed claims from inpatient and outpatient settings related to neuraxial anesthesia for surgical procedures and obstetrics. Patients Forty-five claims were identified for analysis. These patients underwent a variety of surgical procedures, included both children and adults, and with ages ranging from 6 to 82. Interventions Patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia (spinals, epidurals) for surgery or obstetrics. Measurements Data collected includes patient demographics, alleged injury type/severity, surgical specialty, likely contributors to the alleged damaging event, and case outcome. Some of the data were drawn directly from coded variables in the CRICO database, and some were gathered from narrative case summaries. Main results Settlement payments were made in 20% of claims. Reported adverse outcomes ranged from temporary minor to permanent major injuries. Most closed claims were classified as permanent minor injuries. The greatest number of claims involved residual weakness and radiculopathy resulting from epidurals. The largest contributing factor to these injuries was noted to be “Technical Knowledge/Performance” of the anesthesia provider followed by “Missing or Documentation Error.” Over half of the claims arose from obstetric patients (31%) and patients undergoing orthopedic surgery (27%). Conclusions Patients with pre-existing radiculopathy or comorbidities may warrant more thorough informed consent about the increased risk of injury. Additionally, prompt follow-up, monitoring, and documentation of post-operative symptoms, such as weakness or radiculopathy, are crucial for improving patient safety and satisfaction. More timely communication with the patient and the surgical team regarding residual neurologic symptoms is important for earlier diagnosis of injury.

Background: Closed malpractice claims can provide insight into low-frequency adverse events in many areas of perioperative and chronic pain care. Over the last decade, there have been changes in surgical and regional anesthetic practice, likely impacting adverse event patterns. Given the wide variability and low frequency of complications associated with peripheral nerve blocks, the study of closed malpractice claims offers an opportunity to examine adverse events, and the patient, technical, and provider factors that led to the claim. Knowledge gained from examination of closed claims has already resulted in multiple improvements in processes of care and patient safety. Objectives: An investigation of the factors that contributed to medicolegal claims against anesthesia providers related to peripheral nerve blocks. Study Design: Retrospective analysis. Setting: Inpatient and outpatient surgery facilities. Methods: The Comparative Benchmarking System database is a medical liability database that contains more than 400,000 malpractice claims from more than 400 academic and communitybased institutions accounting for over 30% of malpractice claims in the United States. The present investigation reviewed all (n = 113) available closed malpractice claims related to regional anesthesia (RA) in surgical patients closed between 2006 and 2016, and investigated factors that may have contributed to patient injury, including type of nerve block, type of surgery, nerves injured, resulting neurologic deficits, and potential factors contributing to the injury. Results: Our data analyzed 62 claims related to RA and showed that most closed claims were classified as permanent minor injuries. The greatest number of claims were for brachial plexus injuries associated with interscalene blocks performed for shoulder or rotator cuff repairs. Femoral and sciatic nerve blocks with resulting lower extremity injuries were the most common nerve blocks resulting in payment. The largest contributing factor to these injuries was noted to be “Technical Knowledge/Performance” of the regionalist followed by “Pre-existing Injury/Radiculopathy.” Symptom onset from these claims was most likely to be delayed with the leading initial presenting symptom being paresthesia. Limitations: It is difficult to establish cause-effect relationship, and the small sample size limits the ability to detect clinical differences and associations with specific comorbidities or techniques. There was also limited information related to regional anesthetic techniques and medications used that would have helped explore further relationships between the procedure and cause for litigation. Conclusions: There remains significant room for risk reduction in regional anesthetic practice. Patterns based on the analysis of closed claims show that interscalene blocks are the most common peripheral nerve block resulting in litigation, even when compared with other blocks involving the brachial plexus. Furthermore, patients with existing nerve injury/radiculopathy may also warrant alternative techniques or greater emphasis during informed consent on the increased risk of injury. As most of the presenting symptoms associated with claims are delayed, an opportunity for improvement in postregional care may be better communication with patients following discharge to discuss their postoperative recovery. Key words: Regional, pain, anesthesia, complications, closed claims, liability, nerve, block, injury

Objectives To determine if the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function, pain interference, self-efficacy, and global rating of normal function (GRNF) scales are able to accurately characterize a patient’s acceptable symptom state (PASS). Design A cross-sectional analysis, using receiver operator curves and chi-square analysis to explore criteria to determine thresholds (80% and 95% sensitivity/specificity) for PASS that are applicable to PROMIS and GRNF scales. Setting Phone survey after primary care. Participants Patients (N=94) attending primary care for musculoskeletal problems. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcomes Measures Accuracy and proportion of patients classified as PASS Yes or No. Results Receiver operator curve analysis showed significant area under the curve (AUC) values for each PROMIS scale (AUC>.72) and the GRNF rating (AUC=.74). Identified PROMIS thresholds suggested PASS was achieved when scores were at or slightly worse than the US population average. A score of ≥7 and ≤4 characterized patients that were PASS Yes and No, respectively, on the GRNF rating. A moderate (80%) specificity/sensitivity criteria yielded 72.3%-73.5% accuracy for a majority of participants (>69.9%). Conclusion This analysis suggests the PROMIS and GRNF scales are able to characterize PASS status with moderate accuracy (∼70%) for a large portion of patients (∼70%). New to this study is the association of self-efficacy with PASS status. PROMIS scales at or slightly worse than the US population average characterized PASS status.

Background Value-based healthcare models will require prioritization of the patient’s voice in their own care toward better outcomes. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS) gives patients a voice and leads providers to actionable treatments across a broad range of diagnoses. However, better interpretation of PROMIS measures is needed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Self-Efficacy for Managing Symptoms (SE), Pain Interference (PI), Fatigue, and Depression measures to discriminate patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) in primary care, determining if that accuracy is stable over time and/or retained when PROMIS score thresholds are set at either ½ or 1 SD worse than the reference population mean. Methods Primary care patients completed the five PROMIS measures and answered the PASS yes/no question at intake (n = 360), 3–14 days follow-up (n = 230), and 45–60 days follow-up (n = 227). Thresholds (optimal, ½ SD, and 1 SD worse than reference values) for PROMIS T-scores associated with PASS were determined through receiver-operator curve analysis. Accuracy was calculated at the three time points for each threshold value. Logistic regression analyses were used to determine combinations of PROMIS measures that best predicted PASS. Results PROMIS PF, SE, PI, and Fatigue optimal score thresholds (maximizing sensitivity and specificity) yielded area under the curve values of 0.77–0.85, with accuracies ranging from 71.7% to 79.1%. Accuracy increased minimally (1.9% to 5.5%) from intake to follow-ups. Thresholds of 1 SD worse than the mean for PROMIS PF and PI measures and ½ SD worse for SE and Fatigue overall retained accuracy versus optimal (+ 1.3% to − 3.6%). Regression models retained SE, PI, and Fatigue as independent predictors of PASS, and minimally increased accuracy to 83.1?%. Conclusions This study establishes actionable PROMIS score thresholds that are stable over time and anchored to patient self-reported health status, increasing interpretability of PF, SE, PI, and Fatigue scores. The findings support the use of these PROMIS measures in primary care toward improving provider-patient communication, prioritizing patient concerns, and optimizing clinical decision making.

Background: Value-based care models call for better interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Patients may reference health status differently when appraising if an intervention was successful versus if their current state is acceptable. The purpose of this study was to determine the association between success of treatment (SOT), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and PROMIS measure T-scores, following a single primary care physical therapy encounter. Methods: Cross-sectional study. Ninety-two patients with musculoskeletal complaints were administered standard SOT and PASS questions, and PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Self-Efficacy for Managing Symptoms measures. Association of PASS and SOT was determined using rank biserial correlation and chi-squared analysis. Accuracy of PROMIS T-scores to discriminate PASS and SOT was determined through receiver-operator curve analysis and likelihood ratios. Results: There was significant association between PASS and SOT (r=.393, p 0.70 (accuracy 76.1%). Conclusion: PASS was more strongly associated with health status than SOT. Patients make a meaningful distinction between these two questions. Accurate clinician interpretation of PASS, SOT, and PROMIS T-scores can allow more targeted goal setting and treatment decision making.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how symptoms influence patient judgements of their health informs providers where to direct care. Patient reported physical outcomes (physical function, pain interference) and self-efficacy of symptom management (SEsm)) predict a patient's health state (i.e. patient acceptable symptom state (PASS)). However, it's unclear if therapist should consider a psychological outcome like SEsm separately or combine this outcome with other physical outcomes for clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: To determine if patient reported outcome information system (PROMIS) SEsm scale when combined with PROMIS physical function or pain interference is able to accurately predict a patient's health state defined by PASS. METHODS: One hundred ninety-six patients (initial sample (n = 94) and separate sample (n = 102)) were surveyed by phone after care for a musculoskeletal problem. Patients completed PASS, PROMIS physical function, pain interference and SEsm outcomes. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for determining PASS in the initial sample. Criteria for determining PASS developed from the regression analysis were applied to a separate sample to assess accuracy. Accuracy for PASS status were also assessed at 1-7 days and 45-60 days. RESULTS: Three combinations including SEsm/pain interference and SEsm/physical function showed significant OR's (

Study objective To provide an analysis of closed malpractice claims brought against anesthesiologists for positioning-related perioperative nerve injury (PRPNI). Design In this retrospective study, we analyzed closed claims data from the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database. Setting Closed claims involving nerve injuries that occurred between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2015 in all surgical settings, provided the alleged damaging event occurred under general anesthesia. Patients Patient ages ranged from 23 to 94. Patients underwent a variety of surgical procedures. Severity of nerve injury ranged from “Insignificant” to “Grave” according to the NAIC Severity of Injury Code. Interventions None. Measurements Patient age and gender, alleged nerve injury type and severity, operating surgical specialty, contributing factors to the alleged nerve injury, and case outcome. Some of these data were drawn directly from coded variables in the CBS database, and some were gathered by the authors from CRICO-encoded narrative case summaries. Main results Seventy-five claims were determined to represent PRPNI. Ninety-two percent of all PRPNI claims involved practitioner technical knowledge/performance. Of all the recorded nerve injuries in this series, 56% involved brachial plexus injuries, and supine patient positioning represented 55% of brachial plexus claims. Settlement payments were made in 33% of claims, and the average payment for all cases was $46,269. Twenty-four percent of PRPNI claims were found to be temporary, while 76% were permanent. Conclusions PRPNI is multifactorial, and stems both from practitioner errors as well as from patient comorbidities and pre-existing neuropathies. Supine positioning can increase PRPNI risk. There are likely still causes of PRPNI of which we are not yet aware, given that despite concerted efforts towards positioning and padding interventions, injuries such as those described in this study still occur.

There is growing consensus that exercise improves cognitive functioning, but research is needed to identify exercise interventions that optimize effects on cognition. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate Taekwondo implemented in public middle school physical education (PE). Two classes were randomly assigned to either: five sessions per week of PE or three sessions of PE and two sessions of Taekwondo. In PE sessions, evidence-based curriculum to address the Presidential Core Fitness Guidelines and California Physical Fitness Tests was implemented. Taekwondo sessions included traditional techniques and forms taught in an environment emphasizing respect and self-control. Sixty students were evaluated at baseline and during the last week of the intervention (nine months later). Differences in mean residualized change scores for parent-rated inhibitory behavioral control yielded a significant, large effect size (d =.95, p =.00), reflecting greater improvement among Taekwondo students. Results from an executive function computer-administered task revealed greater accuracy on the congruent trial (d = 2.00, p = .02) for Taekwondo students. Differences in mean residualized change scores for BMI z scores yielded a moderate, non-significant effect size (d = − .51, p = .16). The majority of Taekwondo students reported positive perceptions of Taekwondo and perceived self-improvement in self-control and physical fitness. Results suggest that Taekwondo is an exercise program that improves cognitive functioning and is both feasible and acceptable to implement in a public school setting.

Introduction There are relatively few, non-industry sponsored studies examining the outcomes and complications of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). In addition, there is very little literature examining optimal radiographic parameters for placement of CDA. Therefore, we set out to perform a single-center evaluation of the radiographic outcomes and association with complications following CDA. Methods We performed a retrospective review from August 2008 to August 2012 of all patients from a single military tertiary medical center undergoing cervical disc arthroplasty. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final follow-up films were evaluated. The clinical outcomes and complications associated with the procedure were also examined. Results A total of 312 patients were included in the review, with an average radiographic follow-up of 14 months and a 15.1% rate of persistent axial neck pain. For patients with persistent neck pain, the rates of heterotopic ossification (HO) formation and osteolysis were 27.7% and 14.9%, respectively, while the rates were significantly lower for patients without neck pain (12.8% and 6.2%, respectively, p = 0.01). There were no differences in preoperative facet arthrosis, pre- or postoperative disc height, segmental range of motion, or placement of the device relative to the posterior edge of the vertebral body. However, patients with implants more centered between the uncovertebral joints were more likely to experience posterior neck pain ( p =0.03). Conclusions We found that posterior, axial neck pain is relatively frequent after cervical disc arthroplasty, and patients with persistent neck pain were significantly more likely to develop heterotopic ossification or implant-related osteolysis. We also found that patients with implants that were placed off-centered were less likely to also complain of neck pain, though the reasons for this finding are unclear.

Introduction As war injury patterns have changed throughout Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF), a relative increase in the incidence of complex lumbosacral dissociation (LSD) injuries has been noted. LSD injuries are an anatomic separation of the spinal column from the pelvis, and represent a manifestation of severe, high energy trauma. We assessed the clinical outcomes of combat-related LSD injuries after operative treatment. Methods We performed a retrospective review of all patients surgically managed for complex LSD injuries since the beginning of current combat operations in the Middle East. Results A total of 20 patients met inclusion criteria and were treated as follows: posterior spinal fusion (12), sacroiliac screw fixation (7), and combined anterior–posterior fusion (1). The mean age was 28.2 years. The most common mechanism of injury was mounted improvised explosive device (IED, 50%). On average, 2.2 spinal regions were injured per patient. Neurologic dysfunction was present in four patients. Three patients underwent operative stabilization of their injuries before evacuation to the United States. Median time to surgery from injury was 12 days (range, 0–111 days). There was a 20% wound infection rate. Median follow-up was 45.5 months (range, 23.2–105.3 months), and one-third of all patients were medically retired because of their injuries. At most recent follow-up, 45% complained of chronic low back pain and 35% had persistent neurologic deficits; however, 30% were actively engaged in strenuous physical activities, including swimming, distance running, and training for special forces. Conclusion This is the largest series of operatively managed lumbosacral dissociation patients currently reported. Our series suggests that combat-related lumbosacral dissociation injuries frequently result in persistent, long-term neurologic dysfunction, disability, and chronic pain. Operative management carries a high postoperative risk of infection. However, two-thirds of patients were able to remain on active duty after their injuries, and two patients were able to complete marathon training.