Previous Page  222 / 240 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 222 / 240 Next Page
Page Background

Copyright 2014 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Despite the myriad benefits accompanying these trends,

there is certainly the potential for complications, including

thermal injury and skin discoloration, as noted in our analy-

sis. Allegations of inadequate informed consent were raised

in 50% of cases included (17 cases) (Figure 3). Nearly 60% of

these cases (10 cases) were resolved with a payment, com-

pared with the 29% payment rate in cases without this issue,

andmedianpayments trendedhigherwith the presence of this

factor ($246 000vs $150 000), although this trenddidnot reach

statistical significance (

P

= .17) (Table 2). Alleged deficits in in-

formed consent have been consistently found in a variety of

medicolegal analyses.

21,45,55-57

This is particularly important

for cosmetic procedures, in which informed consent allega-

tions can stem from a patient’s expectations not being met

rather than a physician’s simply not mentioning a potential

risk.

44

Consequently, in a comprehensive discussion of risks,

benefits, and alternatives, physicians and patients should ex-

plore specific goals of a procedure, as well as what plan to fol-

low if expectations are not met. Although including the spe-

cific injuries detailed in this analysis (Figure 3) is certainly

Table 3. Cases Resolved With a Plaintiff Verdict

Patient

Age,

y/

Sex

a

Award,

$ Defendant Indication Laser

Qualifi-

cation Burn Pigment

Postop-

erative

Unnec-

essary Consent Additional Work Perm Comments

52/F 977 000 Derm Aging CO

2

Yes

Third

degree

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No No Perioral scarring

F

150 000 Unspeci-

fied

Hair

Unspeci-

fied

No

First

degree

Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes Yes Positive erythema

F

2300 OB

Aging Titan

No

Third

degree

No

No

No

Yes

No

No Yes Involvement of

cheeks, forehead

35/F 20 000 GS

Vascular CO

2

No

No No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No Yes “Should have” used

argon laser

F

391 000 Plastic

Scar

CO

2

No

No No

No

No

Yes

No

No No Lost tip of nose

71/F 1 265 000 Oculo-

plastic

Aging CO

2

No

No No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No Yes Skin breakdown

needing HBO

F

80 000 Derm Vascular Unspeci-

fied

No

No No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes Yes Ulcers that scarred

83/M 200 000 O/A

VC

Unspeci-

fied

No

No No

No

No

No

No

No No See Table 2

M 1 665 000 Oto

Rhinologic Unspeci-

fied

No

No No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes Yes See Table 2

M 850 000 Oto

OSA

Unspeci-

fied

No

No No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes Yes See Table 2

38/F 100 000 Dentist

Dental

b

Unspeci-

fied

Yes

No No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes No Loss of bone; death

of 7 teeth

Abbreviations: Additional, required additional surgery; CO

2

, carbon dioxide;

consent, alleged deficits in informed consent; defendant, defendant specialty;

Derm, dermatologist; GS, general surgeon; hair, hair removal; HBO, hyperbaric

oxygen therapy; indication, indication for procedure; O/A, otolaryngologist and

anesthesiologist codefendants; OB, obstetrician-gynecologist; oculoplastic,

oculoplastic surgeon; OSA, obstructive sleep apnea surgery; Oto,

otolaryngologist; perm, permanent injury; pigment, dyspigmentation; plastic,

plastic surgeon; postoperative, postoperative negligence; qualification,

defendant allegedly not qualified to perform procedure; rhinologic, rhinologic

procedure; unnecessary, unnecessary or inappropriate procedure; vascular,

removal of vascular anomaly; VC, vocal cord procedure; work,

employment/income affected.

a

Ages were not available for many patients.

b

Laser gingivectomy.

Table 4. Allegations in Cases Involving Removal of Vascular Lesions

Patient

Age,

y/Sex

a

Defendant

Award

(S/P), $

Postop-

erative

Unnec-

essary

Consent Additional Perm Comments

35/F

Not specified 20 000 (P) No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

CO

2

laser to remove PWS on neck/jaw; scarring;

plaintiff claimed defendant should have used argon laser

8/M Derm

b

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Candella laser for PWS on face, neck, and arm;

hyperpigmentation; “inappropriate” candidate because

patient was African American

F

Derm

80 000 (P) No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Telangiectasias on face removed; resulting nonhealing

ulcer

F

General

surgeon

b

Yes

No

No

No

No

Postoperative application of aloe, to which patient had

known allergy; facial swelling; physician not in room

during procedure; procedure for veins on cheek

Abbreviations: Additional, required additional surgery; CO

2

, carbon dioxide;

consent, alleged deficits in informed consent; Derm, dermatologist; P, plaintiff

decision; perm, permanent injury; postoperative, postoperative negligence;

PWS, port-wine stain; S/P, settlement or plaintiff decision; unnecessary,

unnecessary or inappropriate procedure.

a

Ages were not available for some patients.

b

Defendant decision.

Lasers and Malpractice

Original Investigation

Research

jamafacialplasticsurgery.com

JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery

July/August 2014 Volume 16, Number 4

200