9400460
Active
Yes
05/21/1994
06/28/2027
See: Actions-Adverse & Administrative Tab
Active Supervisees
| Name | Type | Status | Approved | Inactive |
| None Reported |
North Carolina Hospital Admitting Privileges
Out of State Active/Inactive Licenses
| State |
| North Carolina |
| South Carolina |
| Tennessee |
| Virginia |
Out of Country Active/Inactive Licenses
Address
Advanced Spinal and Neurosurgical Associates
816 Oldfield circle
Florence, SC 29501
704-661-9278
drlarrydavidson.com
Information
Mon - Fri
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Medical School
| School | Graduation |
| East Carolina University | 1988 |
| Med Univ. of South Carolina | 1989 |
| Med. Univ. of South Carolina | 1994 |
Post Graduate Training
"Last Year" does not necessarily mean that the licensee completed his/her training program. (In NC, a physician can be licensed without completing such a program.)
| Institution | Specialty | State, Country | Training Program | Last Year |
| University of Tennessee | Other - Neurosurgery-Complex Spine |
United States of America
| Fellowship | 2000 |
| Medical University of SC | Neurological Surgery |
SC, US
| Residency | 1994 |
| Medical University of SC | General Surgery |
SC, US
| Internship | 1989 |
Current Board Certification and Year of Certification/Recertification
Physicians should not list non-ABMS or non-AOA specialty boards unless the board meets the criteria set forth in the NC Medical Board’s Advertising and Publicity Position Statement.
| Primary/Subspecialty | Year |
| Neurological Surgery | 1998 |
Area of Practice
| Area Of Practice | Primary |
| Neurological Surgery | Yes |
| Spinal Reconstructive Surgery | |
Current Membership in Medical Professional Organizations
| Membership |
| AANS / Spine Section |
| American Association of Neurological Surgeons |
| North American Medical Society |
Honors & Awards
| Honor/Award | Given By | Date |
| None Reported |
Public Service
| Name of Clinic | Service Description | Date |
| None Reported |
Current Academic Appointments
| Title | Institution | City, State, Country |
| None Reported |
Publications
Section 1: Adverse Actions
North Carolina Medical Board Public Actions
This section indicates whether the North Carolina Medical Board has taken adverse public action regarding the
licensee. Click on the link or links below to see an electronic copy of public documents associated with the
licensee.
Certain public documents, such as hearing transcripts, are listed but are not posted on the site. If the record
indicates a transcript is available, it may be obtained by contacting the Board.
NCMB public actions are posted on this site indefinitely.
| Date | Description | Link |
|
05/18/2026
| Consent Order |
View
|
|
10/27/2021
| Public Letter of Concern |
View
|
|
09/28/2018
| Non-Disciplinary Consent Order |
View
|
Other Regulatory Board or Agency Public Actions
| Date | Name of Board/Agency | Action Taken | Link |
| None Reported |
Health Care Institution Suspensions and Revocations
| Date | Health Care Institution | Action Taken |
| None Reported |
Section 2: Administrative Actions
Actions listed in this section are considered non-disciplinary by the Board. In situations where
administrative actions are taken, the licensee may not have met certain statutory requirements or
may have failed to follow correct administrative procedures.
North Carolina Medical Board Reentry Agreement
| Date | Description | Link |
| None Reported |
North Carolina Special Purpose Licensing Agreement
| Date | Description | Link |
| None Reported |
Malpractice Information
This section indicates whether the licensee has been the subject of a malpractice judgment, award,
payment or settlement. In accordance with NC law, the board posts this information for a period of
seven years after the date of the judgment, award, payment or settlement. Settlements of less than
$75,000 or that occurred prior to May 1, 2008 are not included in this information.
The Board encourages the public to consider malpractice payment information in context and in
combination with other information about the licensee’s education, training and professional
experience.
Please see Interpreting Malpractice Payment Information below.
The Board reviewed this payment and determined that no public action was warranted.
| Incident Date | Payment Date | Area of Practice | City, State, Country | Response |
| 11/22/2017 |
12/12/2020
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| I performed a lumbar laminectomy and fusion. Two days later, the patient demonstrated iliopsoas and quadriceps weakness, and a CT showed one screw malpositioned. I revised the screw placement, but the patient continued to experience weakness. Malpositioned screws are an unfortunate but widely recognized complication of lumbar fusion surgeries. In the initial surgery, there was no reason to think any screw was malpositioned, and it was not clear the malpositioned screw caused the patient’s symptoms. Expert reviewers felt I met the standard of care. I had no control over the decision to settle the case. |
| 08/27/2017 |
01/19/2022
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| The patient underwent an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion of the C4/5 for disc herniation and severe C5 radiculopathy. Unanticipated bleeding was encountered prior to actually performing the discectomy. It is felt that an injury to the recurrent laryngeal nerve was incurred. Although the discectomy and fusion proceeded without incident, the patient sustained some degree of hoarseness, unilateral deltoid weakness, and partial unilateral diaphragmatic paresis. Though improving, the patient died a few years later of an unrelated myocardial infarction.
This case in among several which were |
| 10/30/2017 |
01/27/2022
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| The patient underwent multi-level cervical decompression and fusion with instrumentation for cervical stenosis and secondary myelopathy. Approximately a year later, the patient was noted to have developed adjacent level disease requiring further decompression and inferior extension of her fusion construct by my former partner. The patient developed a wound infection which became problematic. The allegation was that if the fusion had initially been extended more inferiorly, a subsequent operation would have never been required.
This case in among several which were all lodged by the same plai |
| 11/15/2017 |
01/27/2022
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| The patient was a 76-year-old female with a past medical history of former smoker, arthritis, basal cell cancer, hypertension, blood clots, and nerve damage from a cyst removal of the right neck. I performed a lumbar decompression and fusion with instrumentation for spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis. The patient later developed an infection ultimately requiring removal of the instrumentation by my former partner.
This case in among several which were all lodged by the same plaintiff’s attorney and originate from the last several months of 2017. The allegations were more concerned about the informed consent not including any discussion regarding a relapse of alcohol abuse. Though there was legal debate regarding the validity of such an allegation, it is important to note that my alcohol use was exclusively extrinsic to any work or on call setting. In fact, numerous hospital staff and coworkers were deposed by the plaintiff’s attorney and there was never any testimony that would in any way substantiate the notion of impairment. Moreover, with all of these cases, including this one, well qualified expert witnesses were deposed and provided testimony that the standard of care was maintained. My legal counsel felt that this case, as well as the others in this group, were quite defendable. However, the insurance carrier, which covered both the hospital and me, elected to settle as a matter of business expediency.
|
| 11/29/2017 |
01/27/2022
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| The patient was a 70-year-old retired married female that resides in a mobile home. She had a medical history of left sided lumbar radicular symptoms to include left leg pain, numbness, tingling, and weakness. In addition, had hypertension, obesity, colon cancer, and daily use of marijuana. The patient underwent a left L2-3 discectomy for herniated disc and secondary radiculopathy. The surgery was uneventful and without apparent complication. However, she alleged persistent lower extremity numbness.
This case in among several which were all lodged by the same plaintiff’s attorney and originate from the last several months of 2017. The allegations were more concerned about the informed consent not including any discussion regarding a relapse of alcohol abuse. Though there was legal debate regarding the validity of such an allegation, it is important to note that my alcohol use was exclusively extrinsic to any work or on call setting. In fact, numerous hospital staff and coworkers were deposed by the plaintiff’s attorney and there was never any testimony that would in any way substantiate the notion of impairment. Moreover, with all of these cases, including this one, well qualified expert witnesses were deposed and provided testimony that the standard of care was maintained. My legal counsel felt that this case, as well as the others in this group, were quite defendable. However, the insurance carrier, which covered both the hospital and me, elected to settle as a matter of business expediency.
|
| 12/29/2017 |
05/04/2022
| Neurological Surgery |
Anderson, SC, US
| The patient was a 47-year-old white female who had a past medical history of diabetes, anxiety, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure. The patient underwent an anterior discectomy at C5-C6 and C6-C7 for spondylosis and secondary myelopathy. She subsequently required further posterior decompression and fusion, and this was performed by my former partner. There were no complications associated with the initial surgery.
This case in among several which were all lodged by the same plaintiff’s attorney and originate from the last several months of 2017. The allegations were more concerned about the informed consent not including any discussion regarding a relapse of alcohol abuse. Though there was legal debate regarding the validity of such an allegation, it is important to note that my alcohol use was exclusively extrinsic to any work or on call setting. In fact, numerous hospital staff and coworkers were deposed by the plaintiff’s attorney and there was never any testimony that would in any way substantiate the notion of impairment. Moreover, with all of these cases, including this one, well qualified expert witnesses were deposed and provided testimony that the standard of care was maintained. My legal counsel felt that this case, as well as the others in this group, were quite defendable. However, the insurance carrier, which covered both the hospital and me, elected to settle as a matter of business expediency.
|
Interpreting Malpractice Payment Information
North Carolina Medical Board Public Action associated with a malpractice payment
An important factor to consider when interpreting malpractice payment information is whether the
payment is associated with a public action of the NC Medical Board. The Board reviews the quality
of care associated with every malpractice payment involving a North Carolina licensee. The Board
takes public action when its investigation determines patient care was below accepted and prevailing
standards.
When considering malpractice payment data, please keep in mind:
-
The existence of a payment does not necessarily mean that malpractice has occurred. Nor is a payment
necessarily evidence of incompetence, misconduct or an admission of wrongdoing on the part of the licensee.
-
It often takes years for a malpractice claim to move through the legal and/or liability insurance systems.
The incident that resulted in a payment may have taken place years before the payment was made.
-
Malpractice payment histories vary by area of practice. Some licensees may have a higher-than-average
incidence of malpractice payments because they specialize in treating patients who are at a high risk
for problems.
-
Malpractice insurance companies sometimes settle cases because it is less costly to make a monetary
settlement than it is to defend a case in court. Many times, such cases are settled without a finding
of fault or admission of negligence by the licensee.
Misdemeanor/DUI/DWI Conviction Information
| Conviction Date | Conviction | Jurisdiction | Sentence |
| None Reported |
Felony Conviction Information
| Conviction Date | Conviction | Jurisdiction | Sentence |
| None Reported |