2119 Do Spine Surgeons With More Experience Fare Better Than Their Younger Counterparts in Malpractice Litigations?

INTRODUCTION: Every early-career spine surgeon aspires to build a strong reputation and avoid decisions that compromise patient outcomes. In the event of legal disputes in spine surgery, it remains uncertain whether less experienced surgeons face harsher judgments or incur heavier costs. METHODS: Westlaw Next was queried for malpractice claims between January 1, 2001 and June 20, 2024 utilizing search terms “spine malpractice” and “neurosurgeon OR orthopedic surgeon.” Data collected included date of incidence, year of medical school graduation, board certification, verdict ruling, monetary awards, and alleged injuries. Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to calculate p-values. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-six seasoned spine surgeons (>10 years of practice at the time of incidence), 46 young spine surgeons (=10 years), and 6 novice spine surgeons (=5 years) were identified. The portion of cases decided in favor of the defense (i.e., surgeon was not found liable) was 78.4% for seasoned surgeons, 80.4% for young surgeons and 83.3% for novice surgeons. Median payout for those who were found liable or chose to settle was $1.17 million (range: $0.03 million-$11.8 million, n=48) for seasoned surgeons, $1.66 million (range: $0.08 million-$16.5 million, n=8) for young surgeons, and $0.56 million (n=1) for novice surgeons. However, the differences in the portion of cases decided in favor of the surgeon and the median payout seen between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the portion of cases decided in favor of spine surgeons or the median payout among novice, young, and seasoned spine surgeons.