Advertisement

Clinical negligence in temporomandibular joint surgery

Published:December 02, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2022.10.001

      Abstract

      This study reviewed the medical reports of 25 patients (21 female and 4 male) who were found to have been treated inappropriately by temporomandibular joint (TMJ) surgery. One of more Breaches of Duty and resultant harms (Causation) were identified for each of the patients in this series. Their ages ranged from 18–64 (mean 36.2, median 35) years. A narrative review of free text data revealed six main patterns of Breach of Duty which were to do with consent, inadequate pre-surgical imaging, injection of botulinum toxin into jaw muscles, TMJ arthroplasty, management of TMJ dislocation and subluxation, and failure or reluctance to request second opinions. Harms identified included surgical damage to the TMJ, facial nerve dysfunction, and social isolation. One sum claimed was in excess of £1 million.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582.

      2. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771.

      3. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board and others [2015] UKSC 11.

      4. Sarlabous M, Psutka DJ. Dislocation of the temporomandibular joint. In Surgical Management: Obstructing the Path. Springer 2018;78–80.

      5. Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Hospital [1985] AC 871.

      6. Mercier, in Robinson v (1) Liverpool University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (2) Mercier (County Court at Liverpool, 9 September 2021).

        • Sidebottom A.J.
        Current thinking in temporomandibular joint management.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 47: 91-94
        • Mercuri L.G.
        A heuristic approach to the management of muscle-related temporomandibular disorders.
        Faculty Dental J. 2013; 4: 112-117
        • Rajapakse S.
        • Ahmed N.
        • Sidebottom A.J.
        Current thinking about the management of dysfunction of the temporomandibular joint.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 55: 351-356
        • Hakim M.A.
        • McCain J.P.
        • Ahn D.Y.
        • et al.
        Minimally invasive endoscopic oral and maxillofacial surgery.
        Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019; 31: 561-567
        • Murakami K.
        Current role of arthrocentesis, arthroscopy and open surgery for temporomandibular joint internal derangement with inflammatory / degenerative disease: pitfalls and pearls.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg Med Pathol. 2021; 34: 1-11
        • Thomas S.M.
        • Matthews N.S.
        Current status of temporomandibular arthroscopy in the United Kingdom.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 50: 642-645
        • Gerber S.
        • Saeed N.
        Predictive risk factors for persistent pain following total prosthetic temporomandibular joint replacement.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022; 60: 650-654
        • Assad A.
        • McGoldrick D.M.
        • Elledge R.O.
        Clinical negligence claims in oral and maxillofacial surgery over the last 10 years.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021; 59: 1259-1263
        • Green M.A.
        • Resnick C.M.
        • Mercuri L.G.
        Characteristics of medical malpractice claims involving temporomandibular joint surgery in the United Sates.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022; 80: 1153-1157