Medical malpractice and sarcoma care--a thirty-three year review of case resolutions, inciting factors, and at risk physician specialties surrounding a rare diagnosis

Abstract

Background: We reviewed medico-legal cases related to extremity sarcoma malpractice in order to recognize those factors most commonly instigating sarcoma litigation.

Methods: Over one million legal cases available in a national legal database were searched for malpractice verdicts and settlements involving extremity sarcoma spanning 1980-2012. We categorized verdict/settlement resolutions by state, year, award amount, nature of the complaint/injury, specialty of the physician defendant, and academic affiliation of defendant-amongst other variables.

Results: Of the 216 cases identified, 57% of case resolutions favored the plaintiff, with a mean indemnity payment of $2.30 million (range $65,076-$12.66 million). Delay in diagnosis (81%), unnecessary amputation (11%), and misdiagnosis (7%) accounted for the majority of complaints. The greatest numbers of claims were filed against primary care specialties (34%), orthopaedic surgeons (23%), and radiologists (12%). Individual state tort reform measures were not protective against case resolution outcome.

Conclusions: Reported medico-legal claims involving sarcoma care continue to rise, with mean indemnity payments approaching 10 times that for other reported medical/surgical specialties. Primary care and orthopaedic specialties are the most commonly named physician defendants, citing a delay in diagnosis. This suggests further education in the front line diagnosis and management of sarcomas is needed.

Keywords: delay in diagnosis; medical malpractice; sarcoma.