• Industrial Engineering and Management Systems
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.37-46
• /
• 2009

Patient safety has become a growing concern in health care. The U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM) report "To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System" in 1999 included estimations that medical error is the eighth leading cause of death in the United States and results in up to 100,000 deaths annually. However, many adverse events and errors occur in surgical practice. Within all kinds of surgical adverse events, wrong-side/wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-patient adverse events are the most devastating, unacceptable, and often result in litigation. Much literature claims that systems must be put in place to render it essentially impossible or at least extremely difficult for human error to cause harm to patients. Hence, this research aims to develop a prototype system based on active RFID that detects and prevents errors in the OR. To fully comprehend the operating room (OR) process, multiple rounds of on site discussions were conducted. IDEF0 models were subsequently constructed for identifying the opportunity of improvement and performing before-after analysis. Based on the analysis, the architecture of the proposed RFID-based OR system was developed. An on-site survey conducted subsequently for better understanding the hardware requirement will then be illustrated. Finally, an RFID-enhanced system based on both the proposed architecture and test results was developed for gaining better control and improving the safety level of the surgical operations.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.17-31
• /
• 1982

A physician assumes toward his patient the obligation to use such reasonable care and skill as is commonly possessed and exercised by physicians in the same general line of practice in the same or similar localities and to use his best judgment at the times. Medical disputes between physicians and patients are, ever more increased in these days as human body, happens to cause a variety of changes in body unlike the function of machine. Such increased trends of medical disputes became a problem in common across the word under the influence of affluent living standard, high consciousness of life value and right by today's people. The aim of this dissertation is oriented to forming a physician's responsibilities in medicalcare accidents arising between physicians and patients. A general physician, for example, has not been negligent merely because, a specialist might have treated the patient with greater skill and knowledge. However, the fact that a physician may have acted to the best of his ability will not avoid legal problems for damages resulting from substandard treatment, that is the degree of care and skill which is to be expected of the ordinary practitioner in his field of practice. The duty of a physician who is, or holds himself out to be, a specialist is greater in the field of his specialty than one who is a general physician. A patient's consent to routine medical procedures is implied from the fact that patient comes to the physician with a medical problem and voluntarily submits to the procedures. For the more serious medical procedures and for major operations, however, it is preferable for the physician to have the patient's consent in writing, to facilitate proof of the consent in the event of a dispute or litigation. Suppose that mistakes on the part of physicians are likely to be blamed in all cases of malpractice. Then it will create a sort of shrinkage in activities of medical treatment. There should be some limitation on excessive application of 'The thing speaks for itself' on mistakes by physicians and availablity of cause and effect. It is a matter of complicity as well as a matter of importance to draw a definite boundary on responsibilities of physician. A series of further research on this particular aspect is strongly urged.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.123-163
• /
• 2014

As results of analyzing judicial precedents about infection in hospitals in connection with mistakes and causality in medical litigations shows that the Mitigation of Law Principles To Prove responsibility in medical litigation has not been able to play its role compared to its intended purposes. And Major sentiment from those judgments is that a mistake can't be proved only by the fact that certain infection in hospital occurred in connection with hospital infection. Therefore, the number of indirect facts to deny estimation is overwhelmingly high. Like this, especially for hospital infection which is difficult to prove indirect facts themselves to estimate mistake, major sentiment from those judgments have a problem that impute sharing of losses caused by hospital infection to patient. In accordance with the Principles of equitable and proper sharing of losses, it's required to prepare legal interpretation and theoretical methods to largely mitigate patient's responsibility to prove medical mistakes compared to other medical litigations in connection with existing Mitigation of Law Principles To Prove responsibility and conventional theory of estimation. In connection with this, the results of review that duty of safety management in hospital infection cases can be the base of conversion of proving responsibility, the duty that prevent hospital infection, corresponding the duty of safety management in hospital infection is not conventional duty of safety management based on duty of good faith but secondary obligation of medical contract. The breach of duty preventing hospital infection is the violation of medical contract, but there is no logical necessity that convert proving responsibility from the obligation of contract itself. Therefore, the duty of preventing hospital infection from the obligation of medical contract, corresponding the duty of safety management in hospital infection cases cannot be the base of conversion of proving responsibility alone. But, it's still required to conversion of proving responsibility in hospital infection, we need further studies on cases of Germany which applies legal estimation of proving responsibilities in hospital infection.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• 제44권4호
• /
• pp.283-292
• /
• 2017

Background Settlements between doctors and patients provide a solution to complicated disputes. However, some disputes may be renewed as a result of negligence by both parties. The purpose of this study was to review the legal issues that may potentially arise during the preparation of settlement agreements and to propose a list of requirements for ensuring the effectiveness of these settlement agreements. Methods Data from 287 civil cases concerning aesthetic surgery that took place between 2000 and 2015 were collected from a court database in South Korea. Factors that influenced the effectiveness of settlement agreements were analyzed. Results Among the 287 court precedents, there were 68 cases of covenant not to sue. Eighteen cases were dismissed because the settlement agreements were recognized as effective, and 50 cases were sent forward for judgment on their merits because the agreements were not recognized as effective. The types of surgery and types of complications were classified by frequency. We evaluated the geographical distribution of the precedents, the settlement timing, and the effectiveness and economic impact of the settlements. We found that there was no statistically significant relationship among these factors. Four major factors that made a settlement agreement legally effective were identified, and the data showed that fee-free reoperations were not considered by the court in determining the compensation amount. Conclusions When preparing a settlement agreement, it is advisable to review the contents of the agreement rather than to take the preparation of a settlement agreement per se to be legally meaningful.

• 척추신경추나의학회지
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.97-105
• /
• 2021

Objectives This study is aimed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment of Korean Medicine for whiplash associated disorders (WAD) and to suggest the direction of future research. Methods We searched papers in Pubmed database to use some keywords indicating whiplash injury syndrome, treatment of Korean Medicine and cost-effectiveness. After searching, appropriate papers were selected depending on the exclusion criteria. The selected papers were analyzed in the sections of author, publication year, intervention and control groups, outcome measurement, the list including in the cost, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and study design. Results Four studies about effect of Korean medicine and 3 studies about economic evaluation were finally included. Acupuncture was effective for balance disorder and neck pain. Economic evaluation studies used analytical decision model or cost-consequence analysis. Cost-effectiveness analysis using visual analog scale and cost-utility analysis using quality adjusted life years were performed. Initiating timing of proper management affected the consequence of treatments. Direct and indirect medical costs including supportive devices, and non-medical costs such as litigation were considered. Conclusions We conclude that studies haven't been conducted so far to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Korean Medicine in whiplash injury syndrome. Thus, future studies are needed in this section.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.281-297
• /
• 2016

임플란트 시술 부위의 정확하고 객관적인 골조직의 평가는 치료계획을 세우고 결과를 예측하는 과정에서 중요한 요소로 작용한다. 골조직 평가는 임플란트가 시술되는 치조골의 상부구조 제작 시기를 결정할 수 있는 가장 객관적 방법이다. 하지만 이러한 골조직 평가가 치과 임상의의 주관적인 견해에 의해서 기초가 수립되기 때문에 상당한 모순을 내포하고 있다. 치과임상들 역시 골조직에 대한 주관적인 평가의 문제점을 지적하고 있다. 따라서 정확하고 객관적인 기준을 마련하는 것이 요청된다. 과거 골밀도 평가는 임플란트 시술시 드릴링 작업과 같이 치고임상의의 주관적인 감각에 의존하였다. 그러나 이제는 컴퓨터 단층 촬영에서 나타난 각 픽셀에 대한 CT의 HU(Hounsfield unit)값을 이용하여 객관적이고 정확한 분류가 가능하게 되었다. Misch와 Kircos는 주관적인 골밀도 분류를 수치화하여 골조직을 D1부터 D5까지 다섯 단계로 나누었다. 하지만, 이 분류 방법도 정량화 된 테이터를 이용한 것이 아니라 감각에 의해 분류한 것을 단지 수치화한 것이다. 그러므로 더욱 객관적이고 정량화된 데이터의 비교 분석을 통해 임플란트 시술 부위의 골질을 평가할 필요가 있다. 임플란트시술은 치과의료분쟁에서 가장 높은 빈도를 차지하고 있다. 따라서 객관적인 검사와 합리적인 치료방법을 도입하여 임플란트 시술이 이루어진다면 의료분쟁에서 보다 합리적인 결과에 도달할 수 있을 것이며, 임플란트 시술의 실패율도 낮아 질 것이다. 따라서 본 연구의 궁극적인 목적은 객관적이고 정량화된 데이터를 기초로 한 법적으로 새로운 기준을 만들어서 환자뿐만 아니라 치과 임상의에게도 발생될 수 있는 의료분쟁을 최소화하고 하고자 하는 것이다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.133-162
• /
• 2019

소득이 늘어나고 의학수준이 높아지면서 전문 의료의 영역이 확대되었고, 의료기술 전반에 대한 국민의 신뢰가 높아지면서 비단 질병을 치료하는 경우 뿐 아니라 생활 속에서의 의료영역은 더욱 넓어지고 있는 추세이나 약물에 대한 남용이나 내성균의 등장으로 인해 여러 가지 문제점 들이 발생하는 것도 사실이다. 언론보도에서 접할 수 있는 병원에서의 감염사례 이외에도, 의료소송을 통하여 분쟁의 대상이 되는 병원감염의 사례는 적지 않은 것이 현실이다. 병원감염에 의한 의료소송에 있어서 병원 자체의 관리나 감독의 소홀을 물어 손해발생의 인과관계를 입증할 수 있다면 피해자의 보호의 수준이 한층 높아질 수 있을 것이다. 병원감염과 관련된 비교법적 고찰을 통해 이러한 문제에 대한 해결점을 찾아보고자 하였다. 특히 병원감염과 관련한 비교법적 검토로서 독일의 입법례는 진료계약을 민법상의 전형계약으로 정해 두고 있어 독일의 민법 규정을 살펴보는 것은 우리 법에게도 시사하는 바가 크다. 또한 프랑스의 특별법 '환자의 권리'를 향상시키고자 노력하였고 이에 따른 판례의 변화도 살펴 볼 수 있다. 마지막으로 미국의 판례상의 과실추정칙의 이론은 원고의 입증의 부담을 줄여주려는 시도로서 배심원제 하에서 적용될 수 있으나 주의의무 위반의 증거제시가 어렵고 침묵의 모의를 통하여 감정단의 증언조차 확보가 어려울 때 참고해 볼 수 있는 이론이 아닌가 생각한다. 본 논문은 병원감염의 의료소송과 관련 될 수 있는 문제들을 비교법적 측면에서 검토하여 증명책임의 완화와 관련하여 우리에게 어떤 시사점이 있는지 찾아보고자 하였다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.89-110
• /
• 2012

No-fault automobile insurance system is a statutory scheme to provide automobile accident victims with compensation for certain expenses arising from personal injuries occurring in car accidents. New York State has enacted No-Fault Law to ensure that the injured in automobile accidents be paid rapidly by their own insurance company for medical expenses, lost earnings regardless of fault, replacing common law system of reparation for personal injuries under tort law. Its primary purpose is to facilitate compensation without the need to exhaust time-consuming litigation over establishing the existence of fault and the extent of damages. No-Fault Law allows arbitration as a method for settling the no-fault insurance disputes. No-fault arbitration, however, differs in a significant way from general arbitration system. First, No-Fault Law provides the parties with the option to submit any dispute involving no-fault automobile insurance to arbitration. Second, no-fault arbitration attempts to speed its procedure incorporating various methods. Third, the parties are required to seek review of arbitral awards by master arbitrator prior to seeking court's review. Fourth, the parties have right to bring de novo action in court if master arbitrator's award exceeds $5,000. Given the current state of law in Korea, it may not be easy to introduce no-fault arbitration system into Korea in the context of automobile insurance disputes settlement as its law has a long-established reparation system based on tort liability and no-fault arbitration system has its own features that differ from general arbitration system. Nonetheless, it could be suggested that no-fault arbitration be introduced in other fields which require speedy dispute resolution and a third party's decision to settle the disputes. The optional right of submitting disputes to arbitration as provided by No-Fault Law of New York State may offer a ground to supprot the effectiveness of an optional arbitration agreement.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.299-346
• /
• 2016

2015년 한해에도 의료분야에서 다양한 판결이 선고되었다. 요양원 입소자에 대하여 요양원측 과실로 상해가 발생하여 요양원을 운영하는 사회복지법인이 환자의 진료를 의뢰한 사건에서 진료계약의 당사자 확정 기준이 제시되었고, 뇌사상태에 빠진 환자 가족의 무의미한 연명치료 중단 요구에 대하여 병원이 이를 거부하고 계속 진료한 경우 청구 가능한 진료비에 관한 판단이 이루어졌다. 안전성이 확인되지 아니하여 2011. 2. 보건복지부로부터 사상 초유의 시술중단조치를 받았던 눈미백수술에 관하여 법원은 시술 자체의 위법성을 인정하지는 아니하였으나 임상시험 단계에 있어 비용 대비 효과가 확립되어 있지 않다는 사실을 설명하지 아니한 설명의무 위반으로 전 손해의 배상을 명하였다. 의료과실을 적극적으로 인정한 판결로는 척추수술 후 마미증후군이 발생한 사건들에서 수술과정상 과실이 인정된 사례가 상당수 있었고, 병원감염 사건에서 감염을 유발한 과실을 인정한 판결이 선고되었다. 응급의료에 관한 법률상 응급장비 설치의무와 응급상황 발생시 조치의무를 구분하여 의료과실을 인정한 판결이 선고되었고, 극히 드문 희귀질환이라 하더라도 그에 대한 적절한 조치를 취하지 않은 의료기관에게 과실을 인정한 판결이 선고되었다. 손해배상의 범위와 관련하여 항소심 신체재감정 결과 노동능력상실률이 1심보다 작아지자 시간의 경과에 따라 노동능력상실률을 달리 적용하거나 환자의 상태에 따라 노동능력상실률을 신체감정 결과보다 낮게 인정하는 등 실체진실에 부합하는 판결이 선고되었다. 의료과실로 손해가 발생한 경우 의료사고 후 발생한 진료비에 책임제한이 적용되는지 여부와 관련하여 법원은 병원에서 환자 상태의 치유 또는 악화를 방지하는 정도의 치료만 계속되었다면 환자에게 진료비 지급을 청구할 수 없다는 이유로 병원 측의 상계주장을 배척하였다. 사전심의를 받지 않은 의료광고를 금지하고 그 위반시 처벌하는 의료법 규정에 대하여 사전심의기관인 대한의사협회 등의 행정기관성을 부인할 수 없어 사전검열에 해당한다는 이유로 위헌결정이 내려졌다. 임상에서 흔하게 시행되고 있는 PRP 치료가 법정비급여에 해당하는지 여부에 관하여 법원은 법정비급여 여부는 이론적인 가능성이나 실제 실시 여부 등에 따라 결정되는 것이 아니라 의학적 안전성 유효성을 인정받은 후 요양급여 또는 비급여대상으로의 편입절차를 거쳐야 함을 분명히 하였다. 또한 법원은 요양병원 적정성 평가에 관한 행정소송에서, 구조부문의 조사방식이나 절차상 위법을 인정하면서도 그 위법사유의 정도가 당연무효에까지는 이르지 아니하고 평가기관의 고의 과실이 없다는 이유로 건강보험심사평가원과 국민건강보험공단에 부당이득반환이나 손해배상의무가 없다는 판단을 하였다. 향후 더욱 다양하게 제기되는 쟁점들에 관하여 명쾌한 법리를 통해 실체진실에 다가가는 판결을 기대해본다.