Surgery of the hallux valgus in an ambulatory setting: a liability risk?

  • L. GaloisEmail author
  • J.-M. Serwier
  • A. D. Arashvand
Original Article • FOOT - HALLUX VALGUS



The primary objective of the study is to make an inventory of malpractice in hallux valgus surgery in an ambulatory setting and to identify the patient characteristics for a higher risk of malpractice. The secondary objective is creating a methodology for analyzing the medicolegal aspects of a surgery in day case comparing with hospitalization.

Materials and methods

The database of the Branchet insurance company was used. A total of 11,000 claims for a period of 11 years (2002–2013) have been investigated. The files of the patients with hallux valgus surgery were isolated from the insurer’s database using CCAM codes. The medical director, a medical officer, the legal expert and finally the judge had already analyzed all these cases. The authors reviewed the various documents with a specific questionnaire.


We identified 14 cases of claims in relation with hallux valgus 1-day surgery among a total of 138 claims for hallux valgus including all techniques (10%). All patients were female. The mean age was 42.6 years (19–64) in ambulatory patients (AG group) in comparison with 49.5 years (19–73) in hospitalized patients (HG group). Percutaneous techniques were significantly more represented in the AG group (p = 0.002) and scarfs osteotomies in the HG group (p = 0.004). The use of tourniquet seemed to be lower in the AG group, but it was a not significant trend (p = 0.085). In term of anesthesia procedures, no significant differences were seen between the two groups. The comparison of the complications common to both groups showed no significant difference except for insufficient results which were more frequent in the AG group (p = 0.026). The rate of insufficient informed consent seemed to be higher in the AG group, but it was a not significant trend (p = 0.084).

Discussion and conclusion

No specific data regarding claims in relation with hallux valgus 1-day surgery are available to our knowledge in the literature. We did not identify in our study specific complications related to ambulatory procedures except for insufficient results. Hallux valgus 1-day surgery does not seem to expose surgeons to higher medicolegal problems than classical hospitalization. Nevertheless, a specific consent form for ambulatory patients is required to limit claims regarding information.


Hallux Valgus Ambulatory Setting Postoperative Pain Management Malpractice Claim Anesthesia Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bontemps G (2014) Development of day surgery in France: more constraints for more performance? Presse Med 43(3):275–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vons C (2014) Ambulatory surgery: an evolution of both the surgical technics and the way of care. To excellence in surgery. Presse Med 43(3):278–282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wodey E, de la Brière F (2013) Ambulatory surgery in France: practical and medicolegal considerations. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 32(12):243–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Steenhagen E (2016) Enhanced recovery after surgery: it’s time to change practice! Nutr Clin Pract 31(1):18–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Manchikanti L, Parr AT, Singh V, Fellows B (2011) Ambulatory surgery centers and interventional techniques: a look at long-term survival. Pain Phys 14(2):177–215Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    RRAC et Chirurgie Ambulatoire: nouveaux enjeux médico-légaux. Colloque du 7 février 2015. Paris. ASSPROGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGrath B, Elgendy H, Chung F et al (2004) Thirty percent of patients have moderate to severe pain 24 h after ambulatory surgery: a survey of 5703 patients. Can J Anaesth 51:886–891CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ludwin DB (2014) Setting up an ambulatory regional anesthesia program for orthopedic surgery. Anesthesiol Clin 32(4):911–921CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Galois L, Favier T, Serwier JM (2016) Percutaneous surgery of hallux valgus: medicolegal aspects. Med Chir Pied 32:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Metzner J, Kent CD (2012) Ambulatory surgery: is the liability risk lower? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 25(6):654–658PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Adam F, Pelle-Lancien E, Bauer T et al (2012) Anesthesia and postoperative analgesia after percutaneous hallux valgus repair in ambulatory patients. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 31:265–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beaussier M, Sciard D, Sautet A (2016) New modalities of pain treatment after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102(Suppl 1):S121–S124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Graff W, Mouton A, Ferré B (2015) La gestion post-opératoire. In: Colombier JA, Toullec E (eds) Chirurgie du pied et de la cheville en mode ambulatoire. Elsevier Masson, Paris, pp 75–78Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Theissen A, Fuz F, Catineau J et al (2014) Epidemiology of the medico-legal risk associated with the practice of ambulatory surgery in France: a study based on insurance data. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 33:158–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery DepartmentCentral Hospital, University Hospital of NancyNancy CedexFrance
  2. 2.Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery DepartmentUniversity Hospital of Mons-HainautMonsBelgium

Personalised recommendations