Expert Witness Testimony in Spine Surgery: A Review of Guidelines and Recommendations From Professional Organizations. Issue 3 (18th March 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zhang, Justin K.; Botterbush, Kathleen S.; Mercier, Philippe; Mattei, Tobias A.
• Is Part Of: Neurosurgery. Volume 92:Issue 3(2023)
• Page Start: 441
• Page End: 449
• Publication Date: 2023-03-18
• Subjects: Expert witness -- Spine surgery -- Malpractice -- Litigation -- Tort reform; Nervous system -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.48005
• DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002226
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0148-396X

Abstract

Abstract : BACKGROUND: Most professional spine societies have enacted formal guidelines for spine surgeons providing expert witness services. However, there is significant heterogeneity in existing recommendations, with most societies providing information that is limited in detail and scope. OBJECTIVE: To provide a review of guidelines published by professional spine societies for spine surgeons serving as expert witnesses. METHODS: The Gale Directory Library, PubMed, and the grey literature were queried for national or international professional societies related to spine surgery. The search was focused on societies in the United States and North America, but also included well recognized international organizations in the field of spine surgery. Included societies with publicly available guidelines regarding expert witness services were extracted for 4 domains: (1) qualifications, (2) preparations, (3) testimony, and (4) compensation as well as the presence of a professional compliance program, defined as any official subcommittee aimed toward investigating claims of unethical behavior. RESULTS: Although most professional spine societies share general themes with respect to expert witness guidelines, important differences exist. Of the 26 societies included, 10 included publicly available guidelines: 4 of which were general neurosurgery societies, 2 general orthopedic surgery, and 4 spine specific. Three societies included the guidelines on all 4 domains (ie, qualifications, preparations, testimony, and compensation), and 2 societies included only 1 of the 4 domains. Eight societies possess a professional compliance program. CONCLUSION: There remains a paucity in expert witness guidelines provided by professional spine societies. Although existing recommendations are useful, there is a lack of standardized and comprehensive materials for spine surgeons providing expert witness testimony to reference. Moving forward, joint committees comprising surgeons, attorneys, and patient stakeholders may help improve the guidelines.