You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 129 No. 1, January 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (6)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Law and Medicine
 •Neurology
 •Neuro-otology
 •Patient-Physician Relationship/ Care
 •Patient-Physician Communication
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Medical Malpractice and Facial Nerve Paralysis

Daniel D. Lydiatt, DDS, MD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129:50-53.

Background  Iatrogenic facial nerve paralysis is a devastating surgical complication that occasionally results in litigation.

Objective  To analyze litigation trends to better understand the causes and outcomes of suits involving facial nerve paralysis to prevent future litigation and improve physician education.

Design  Retrospective review.

Setting  All US civil trials.

Participants  All state and federal civil trials alleging malpractice and facial nerve paralysis were reviewed.

Methods  Jury verdict reviews from January 1, 1985, to December 31, 2000, were obtained from a computerized legal database and analyzed. Reviews compile data on defendants, plaintiffs, allegations of wrongdoing, and expert witness specialties, and provide case summaries. Fifty-three cases from 19 of the 50 states were obtained. Data were entered into a spreadsheet for analysis.

Main Outcome Measures  Verdicts and indemnity payments.

Results  Suits reviewed were as follows: cosmetic, 12 (23%); otologic, 13 (25%); nonneoplastic disease of the parotid or other benign conditions of the head and neck, 15 (28%); benign neoplasms of the parotid, 9 (17%); malignant neoplasms of the parotid, 1 (2%); and temporomandibular joint operations, 3 (6%) (percentages do not total 100 because of rounding). Allegations of negligence were frequently multiple and included lack of informed consent (16 [30%] of 53), failure to diagnose (10 [19%] of 53), and surgical misadventures (47 [89%] of 53). Excluding failure to obtain consent or to diagnose, 28 suits still alleged negligence based solely on a surgical misadventure. Of these suits, 12 (63%) resulted in plaintiff awards.

Conclusions  Surgeons must emphasize and document the likelihood and consequences of this devastating complication to all patients undergoing surgery in this area. Risk management goals include a thorough and timely examination and careful and thoughtful surgical approaches. However, patient rapport and bedside manner may be the only protection the surgeon has from litigation arising from this complication.


From the Division of Head and Neck Oncology, Department of Otolaryngology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, and the Methodist Hospital Cancer Center, Omaha.



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Malpractice Litigation After Surgical Injury of the Spinal Accessory Nerve: An Evidence-Based Analysis
Morris et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;134:102-107.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Jury Findings of Malpractice Despite the Evidence
Benecke
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:1355-1355.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2003 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.