Un análisis exhaustivo de las reclamaciones por mala praxis tras el manejo de fracturas de cadera

Hip fractures are highly prevalent and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of malpractice claims related to hip fractures. The Westlaw legal database was queried for all malpractice cases involving hip fractures from 1978 to 2020. Demographic data, monetary payouts, reasons for litigation, and case outcomes were analyzed. In total, 80 cases were included with a mean plaintiff age of 58 years and 60% female. Fifty-five cases (69%) resulted in a defendant verdict, while 25 cases (31%) resulted in a plaintiff verdict/settlement. The most common reasons for litigation were procedural/intraoperative errors (52, 65%), need for additional surgery (40, 50%), functional limitation (27, 34%), and continued/worsened pain (24, 30%). Multivariable logistic regression modeling showed that only diagnostic error was significantly associated with a plaintiff verdict (OR 12.57). Inflation-adjusted indemnity payments for cases resulting in plaintiff verdict/settlement ranged from $83,404 to $10,424,587. In conclusion, diagnostic error was associated with a plaintiff verdict, reinforcing the importance of timely and accurate diagnosis. Monetary awards to plaintiffs ranged from $86,000 to over $10 million; however, more than two-thirds of cases resulted in a verdict in favor of the defendant.