{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,9]],"date-time":"2025-10-09T21:04:06Z","timestamp":1760043846992,"version":"3.44.0"},"reference-count":29,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,2]],"date-time":"2021-08-02T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1627862400000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc-nd\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["lww.com","ovid.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,9]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Background:<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The purpose of this study is to investigate the most common reasons for and judicial outcomes of malpractice claims related to stress urinary incontinence (SUI) management.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Materials and methods:<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>Using the Westlaw database, a search was performed using the terms \u201cmedical malpractice\u201d or \u201cnegligence\u201d in combination with \u201cstress incontinence\u201d or \u201cstress urinary incontinence\u201d between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 2020. Extracted information included trial date, demographic information, defendant profession, procedure performed, procedure complications, alleged malpractice, trial outcome, and monetary award. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Results:<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The Westlaw search yielded 79 case results. Of the cases, 70.4% (n\u200a=\u200a38\/54) had a defense verdict, 22.2% (n\u200a=\u200a12\/54) had a plaintiff verdict, and 7.4% (n\u200a=\u200a4\/54) were settled. The most commonly implicated procedure was mid-urethral sling (63.2%, n\u200a=\u200a36\/57). Among the plaintiffs, 48.4% (n\u200a=\u200a61\/126) claimed negligence in preoperative care, 33.3% (n\u200a=\u200a42\/126) claimed negligence in surgical performance, and 18.3% (n\u200a=\u200a23\/126) claimed negligence in postoperative care. Lack of informed consent was the most common complaint related to negligence in preoperative care (42.6%, n\u200a=\u200a26\/61). The average indemnity payment was $1,253,644 for preoperative care negligence, $1,254,491 for surgical performance negligence, and $2,239,198 for postoperative care negligence. Of the defendants, 63.4% (n\u200a=\u200a52) were gynecologists and 36.6% (n\u200a=\u200a30) were urologists.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Conclusions:<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>Negligent preoperative care, with a particular emphasis on failure to obtain informed consent, and negligent surgical performance are the leading causes of malpractice claims during SUI management. Mid-urethral sling was the most commonly litigated procedure. This study highlights key factors to consider in minimizing malpractice risk during SUI management.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1097\/cu9.0000000000000033","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,4]],"date-time":"2021-08-04T08:41:01Z","timestamp":1628066461000},"page":"137-142","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/lww.0000000000001000","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Medical malpractice in stress urinary incontinence management: A 30-year legal database review"],"prefix":"10.1097","volume":"15","author":[{"given":"Niccola B.","family":"Lynch","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Linhan","family":"Xu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"David","family":"Ambinder","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Rena D.","family":"Malik","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"276","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,2]]},"reference":[{"issue":"(9)","key":"R1-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1569","DOI":"10.1377\/hlthaff.2009.0807","article-title":"National costs of the medical liability system","volume":"29","author":"Mello","year":"2010","journal-title":"Health Aff (Millwood)"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"R2-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"657","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jamcollsurg.2011.08.005","article-title":"Personal consequences of malpractice lawsuits on American surgeons","volume":"213","author":"Balch","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Am Coll Surg"},{"issue":"(7)","key":"R3-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"629","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMsa1012370","article-title":"Malpractice risk according to physician specialty","volume":"365","author":"Jena","year":"2011","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"R4-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2004.02.003","article-title":"Understanding the burden of stress urinary incontinence in Europe: A qualitative review of the literature","volume":"46","author":"Hampel","year":"2004","journal-title":"Eur Urol"},{"issue":"(8)","key":"R5-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1175","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-016-2954-3","article-title":"Stress urinary incontinence is highly prevalent in recreationally active women attending gyms or exercise classes","volume":"27","author":"McKenzie","year":"2016","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"(8)","key":"R6-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1381","DOI":"10.1023\/B:QURE.0000040794.77438.cf","article-title":"Urinary incontinence in women under 65: Quality of life, stress related to incontinence and patterns of seeking health care","volume":"13","author":"Margalith","year":"2004","journal-title":"Qual Life Res"},{"issue":"(4)","key":"R7-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"875","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2017.06.061","article-title":"Surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: AUA\/SUFU guideline","volume":"198","author":"Kobashi","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"R8-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1890","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2008.07.029","article-title":"Complications of mid urethral slings: Important outcomes for future clinical trials","volume":"180","author":"Daneshgari","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(21)","key":"R9-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2143","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa070416","article-title":"Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence","volume":"356","author":"Albo","year":"2007","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"(6)","key":"R10-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"392","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000495","article-title":"Complications of urethral bulking agents for stress urinary incontinence: An extensive review including case reports","volume":"24","author":"de Vries","year":"2018","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"R11-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"120","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2019.05.035","article-title":"Legal review of vasectomy litigation and the variables impacting trial outcomes","volume":"131","author":"Blazek","year":"2019","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"(10)","key":"R12-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2589","DOI":"10.1111\/jsm.12649","article-title":"Penile prostheses and the litigious patient: A legal database review","volume":"11","author":"Sunaryo","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Sex Med"},{"issue":"(6)","key":"R13-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"849","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jemermed.2015.06.052","article-title":"Malpractice litigation and testicular torsion: A legal database review","volume":"49","author":"Colaco","year":"2015","journal-title":"J Emerg Med"},{"issue":"(6)","key":"R14-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1770","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2013.12.003","article-title":"Influencing factors leading to malpractice litigation in radical prostatectomy","volume":"191","author":"Colaco","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"R15-20250821","article-title":"A 30\u200ayear review of cystectomy litigation","volume":"8","author":"Xu","year":"2020","journal-title":"Urol Pract"},{"key":"R16-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"19","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2020.08.049","article-title":"Malpractice litigation in iatrogenic ureteral injury: A legal database review","volume":"146","author":"Bole","year":"2020","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"R17-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2020.0427","article-title":"Litigation patterns in oncologic nephrectomies: A 30 year review","author":"Herbert","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Endourol"},{"issue":"(4)","key":"R18-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"255","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000795","article-title":"Medical malpractice litigation in non-mesh-related pelvic organ prolapse surgery: An analysis of 91 cases","volume":"27","author":"Yao","year":"2021","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Re"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"R19-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1847","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(05)01021-9","article-title":"Medical malpractice liability in clinical urology: A survey of practicing urologists","volume":"175","author":"Sobel","year":"2006","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(3)","key":"R21-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"340.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.05.037","article-title":"Trends in malpractice claims for obstetric and gynecologic procedures, 2005 through 2014","volume":"217","author":"Glaser","year":"2017","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"(3)","key":"R22-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1086","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2010.05.034","article-title":"Urological malpractice: Analysis of indemnity and claim data from 1985 to 2007","volume":"184","author":"Benson","year":"2010","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"R23-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2015.03.004","article-title":"The current state of medical malpractice in urology","volume":"86","author":"Sherer","year":"2015","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"R24-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2154","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2006.07.024","article-title":"Medical malpractice in urology, 1985 to 2004: 469 consecutive cases closed with indemnity payment","volume":"176","author":"Perrotti","year":"2006","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"R25-20250821","first-page":"109","article-title":"The standard of care: Legal history and definitions: The bad and good news","volume":"12","author":"Moffett","year":"2011","journal-title":"West J Emerg Med"},{"issue":"(2)","key":"R26-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"237","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2012.04.008","article-title":"Synthetic mesh in the surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse: Current status and future directions","volume":"80","author":"Keys","year":"2012","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"(2)","key":"R27-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"221","DOI":"10.1097\/GRF.0b013e31828e63d4","article-title":"Medicolegal issues surrounding devices and mesh for surgical treatment of prolapse and incontinence","volume":"56","author":"Nosti","year":"2013","journal-title":"Clin Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"R28-20250821","first-page":"CD006375","article-title":"Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women","volume":"7","author":"Ford","year":"2015","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"issue":"(2)","key":"R29-20250821","first-page":"825","article-title":"Surgery for urinary incontinence in women: Report from the 6th international consultation on incontinence","volume":"38","author":"Gomelsky","year":"2018","journal-title":"Neurol Urodynam"},{"issue":"(12)","key":"R30-20250821","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1365","DOI":"10.1001\/archinte.1994.00420120093010","article-title":"The doctor-patient relationship and malpractice: Lessons from plaintiff depositions","volume":"154","author":"Beckman","year":"1994","journal-title":"Arch Intern Med"}],"container-title":["Current Urology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/10.1097\/CU9.0000000000000033","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,21]],"date-time":"2025-08-21T16:02:05Z","timestamp":1755792125000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/10.1097\/CU9.0000000000000033"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,2]]},"references-count":29,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/cu9.0000000000000033","relation":{},"ISSN":["1661-7649","1661-7657"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"1661-7649"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1661-7657"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,2]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2020-12-08","name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2020-12-26","name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}