Litigation in English rhinology

J Laryngol Otol. 2015 Mar;129(3):244-9. doi: 10.1017/S0022215115000286.

Abstract

Objective: Litigation is a rising financial burden on the National Health Service. This study aims to show if litigation is increasing in rhinology and which procedures lead to the most claims.

Methods: Ten years of data were obtained from the National Health Service Litigation Authority. Rhinology claims were examined for cost, injury, diagnosis and operation type.

Results: Of the 123 rhinology claims identified, 52 per cent were successful. There was a 56 per cent increase in the average annual number of claims between the first half of the study period and the second (p = 0.0451). The commonest reasons for a claim were poor cosmesis (15.6 per cent) and lack of informed consent (14 per cent).

Conclusion: The number of claims in rhinology increased over the study period. Most claims resulted from poor cosmetic outcome, lack of consent or recognised complications. It is suggested that enhanced communication and management of patient expectations could reduce litigation and improve patient satisfaction.

Keywords: Otolaryngology.

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Informed Consent / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Insurance Claim Review / statistics & numerical data
  • Malpractice / economics
  • Malpractice / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Medical Errors
  • Nasal Surgical Procedures / adverse effects
  • Nasal Surgical Procedures / legislation & jurisprudence
  • National Health Programs / economics
  • National Health Programs / legislation & jurisprudence*
  • Otolaryngology / economics
  • Otolaryngology / legislation & jurisprudence*
  • Surgery, Plastic / adverse effects
  • Surgery, Plastic / legislation & jurisprudence
  • United Kingdom