• 한국임상보건과학회지
• /
• 제12권1호
• /
• pp.1660-1667
• /
• 2024

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify Relationship between job stress and job satisfaction of dental hygienists Methods: The subjects of this study were to 173 dental hygienists who work in dental diseases and clinics in Busan, Ulsan, and Gyeongnam, and through the Internet link using web questionnaire from August 1 to October 30, 2023. Distributed and collected. The collected data were analyzed using an IBM SPSS ver. 26. Results: As for general characteristics, job stress was high in the 40s age group, work experience was high in the 1-4 year group, and job satisfaction was high in the 4-7 year or more group. As factors affecting job satisfaction, it was found that the lower the Self- determination of duties , the lower the Job insecurity, and the lower the Inadequate compensation, the higher the job satisfaction. Conclusions: From the above results, in order to increase the job satisfaction of dental hygienists, it is necessary to ensure stable employment and at the same time allow them to focus on tasks specific to dental hygiene, as job satisfaction decreases if a lot of chores unrelated to dental hygiene work are performed, and Self- determination of duties and an appropriate compensation system must be established. If an excessive workload is given or there is frequent overtime work, compensation should be made commensurate with experience or ability, and in the case of frequent overtime work, appropriate compensation should be provided through allowances or incentives.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제21권2호
• /
• pp.163-207
• /
• 2020

우리나라의 임상시험은 최근 10년간 그 규모가 성장하여 임상시험 산업의 주요 국가로 자리매김 하였다. 임상시험은 의료수준의 발전 및 치료 가능성의 확대를 위해 중요한 의미를 지니고 있다. 그러나 임상시험은 의약품 등의 안전성과 유효성을 증명하기 위한 것으로서 본질적으로 위험성을 내포하고 있으므로, 적절히 통제되어야만 임상시험대상자의 건강과 자기결정권이라는 법익을 보호할 수 있다. 이를 위해 임상시험을 수행하는 의사의 선관주의의무 이행이 특히 중요하다. 약사법과 그 하위법령은 시험자인 의사가 준수하여야 할 여러 의무를 규정하고 있다. 이 중 대상자 보호의무와 설명의무는 의사의 임상시험대상자에 대한 주된 선관주의의무를 구성한다. 이는 통상적인 의사의 진료행위에 있어서의 주의의무 및 설명의무와도 본질적으로 그 보호법익과 내용이 유사하다. 임상시험의 경우 통상적인 진료행위의 경우보다 가중된 설명의무가 요구된다. 임상시험에서의 구체적인 주의의무 기준 설정은 향후 판결과 연구를 통해 이루어져야 할 것이나. 주의의무의 기준을 막연히 높이거나 입증책임을 전환하는 등으로 임상시험을 수행하는 의사의 책임을 가중시킬 경우, 자칫 임상시험의 발전 및 환자의 새로운 치료법에 대한 접근성을 저해하고 손해의 공평·타당한 분담이라는 원칙에 위배될 우려가 있다. 이러한 의무들 외에도 임상시험에 대한 법령은 의사에 대해 여러 의무를 규정하고 있는바, 이러한 법령의 위반이 선관주의의무 위반에 해당함으로써 손해배상책임이 인정되는지의 문제는 해당 법령이 부수적으로라도 임상시험대상자의 안전과 이익을 보호하기 위한 것인지 여부, 대상자의 법익 침해의 유무와 정도, 법령위배행위의 태양 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다. 이와 같은 여러 의무의 충실한 준수가 이루어지도록 담보하고, 구체적 사안에서 임상시험대상자의 법익이 적절히 보호되었는지에 대해 사법(司法)적, 행정적 통제를 함으로써 법익 보호를 효과적으로 담보할 수 있을 것이다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.309-341
• /
• 2009

According to a case of Supreme Court's Sentence No. 2009DA17417 (May 21, 2009), the Supreme Court judges that 'the right to life is the ultimate one of basic human rights stipulated in the Constitution, so it is required to very limitedly and conservatively determine whether to discontinue any medical practice on which patient's life depends directly.' In addition, the Supreme Court admits that 'only if a patient who comes to a fatal phase before death due to attack of any irreversible disease may execute his or her right of self-determination based on human respect and values and human right to pursue happiness, it is permissible to discontinue life-sustaining treatment for him or her, unless there is any special circumstance.' Furthermore, the Supreme Court finds that 'if a patient who is attacked by any irreversible disease informs medical personnel of his or her intention to agree on the refusal or discontinuance of life-sustaining treatment in advance of his or her potential irreversible loss of consciousness, it is justifiable that he or she already executes the right of self-determination according to prior medical instructions, unless there is any special circumstance where it is reasonably concluded that his or her physician is changed after prior medical instructions for him or her.' The Supreme Court also finds that 'if a patient remains at irreversible loss of consciousness without any prior medical instruction, he or she cannot express his or her intentions at all, so it is rational and complying with social norms to admit possibility of estimating his or her own intentions on withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, provided that such a withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment meets his or her interests in view of his or her usual sense of values or beliefs and it is reasonably concluded that he or she could likely choose to discontinue life-sustaining treatment, even if he or she were given any chance to execute his or her right of self-determination.' This judgment is very significant in a sense that it suggests the reasonable orientation of solutions for issues posed concerning withdrawal of meaningless life-sustaining medical efforts. The issues concerning removal of medical instruments for meaningless life-sustaining treatment and discontinuance of such treatment in regard to medical treatment for terminal cases don't seem to be so much big deal when a patient has clear consciousness enough to express his or her intentions, but it counts that there is any issue regarding a patient who comes to irreversible loss of consciousness and cannot express his or her intentions. Therefore, it is required to develop an institutional instrument that allows relevant authority to estimate the scope of physician's medical duties for terminal patients as well as a patient's intentions to withdraw any meaningless treatment during his or her terminal phase involving loss of consciousness. However, Korean judicial authority has yet to clarify detailed cases where it is permissible to discontinue any life-sustaining treatment for a patient in accordance with his or her right of self-determination. In this context, it is inevitable and challenging to make better legislation to improve relevant systems concerning withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. The State must assure the human basic rights for its citizens and needs to prepare a system to assure such basic rights through legislative efforts. In this sense, simply entrusting physician, patient or his or her family with any critical issue like the withdrawal of meaningless life-sustaining treatment, even without any reasonable standard established for such entrustment, means the neglect of official duties by the State. Nevertheless, this issue is not a matter that can be resolved simply by legislative efforts. In order for our society to accept judicial system for withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, it is important to form a social consensus about this issue and also make proactive discussions on it from a variety of standpoints.

• 대한간호학회지
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.190-205
• /
• 1994

Respect for human life and respect for human dignity are two basic values to which organized nursing has urged its members to adhere in their service to mankind. Thus it is the nurses’ duty to provide health care in support of sustenance of life and to pay respect for the patient’s right to dignity. In practice, however, nurses may experience dilemmas between these duties much due to the de velopment of modern advanced techniques. These dilemmas have become more complex and difficult to resolve. Nurses are often faced with situations in which the terminally ill refuse professional care, posing serious conflicts between respect for human life and respect for human rights to self-determination. In such cases, resolution of the problem is not a simple matter, thus requires intensive study into the ethical questions related to the situation. The purpose of this study was to identify ethical problems that nurses experience in caring for terminally ill patients and explore the ways to the resolution of problems within the context of the situations. The methodology used for the study was a case study method which ‘New Casuistry’ proposed by Jonsen & Toulmin(1988) and the ‘Specified Principlism’ proposed by Degrazia(1992) as an alternative to old deductive and intuitive method. Cases were developed through semistructured indepth interviews according to the casutistry method. A total of seven nurses were interviewd who were caring for therminally ill patients. Four cases out of a total 14 cases were related to the topic. Through the case analysis it became evident that nurses appreciated other values more often than respect for the patient’s right to self-determination. These other values were convenience and efficiency in nursing practice in case 1, preservation of life above all other values in case 2, provision of nursing care to fulfill the nurse’s professional obligation at most in case 3, and respect for the family’s demand against the patient’s wish in case 4. This study showed that the most important ethical problems were conflict between respect for the patient’s right to self-determination and sustenance of life for the fulfillment of professional obligation. For this problem, benefit /burden analysis from the perspective of the patient and family for the promotion of patient’s wellbeing may be a way to resolve the conflict. Further, through these analysis it was shown that physicians’ and families’ opinions dominated in the decision - making and the opinions of nurses’ and patients’ tended not to be reflected. Thus the patient's right to his or her care was not readily respected. To solve this problem. nurses should make efforts to communicate reciprocally with their patients, family members and physicians in an effort to respect for their patient’s rights to life and diginity from the point of view and values of the patient. It is also important that nurses provide good basic nursing care up to the time of death regardless of decisions about providing or not aggressive treat-ment for chronically and terminally ill patients.

• 융합정보논문지
• /
• 제9권5호
• /
• pp.228-235
• /
• 2019

본 연구의 목적은 정신장애인의 공공후견서비스 사업이 당사자의 의사결정을 지원하고 권익옹호를 하는 제도로서 역할을 하고 있는지 그 경험과 과제를 탐구하는 것이다. 연구방법은 Strauss와 Corbin(1998)의 근거이론을 이용하여 공공 후견법인 후견업무 실무자 11명을 대상으로 전문가인터뷰를 실시하고, 과정분석과, 유형분석 등을 통해 실천모형을 제시하였다. 연구결과로는 정신장애인의 공공후견서비스를 통해, 후견의 권리옹호의 가능성과 시설의 긍정적인 태도변화 및 정신장애인의 권리회복을 위한 방향성 확립 등이 도출되었다. 공공후견법인 종사자들은 후견인에 대한 과도한 권한 부여나 업무 과정에서의 여러 어려움을 경험하지만 정신장애인들의 권리를 옹호하고 자기결정권을 지원할 수 있는 경험을 하였다. 본 연구를 통해 후견서비스의 필요성과 확대의 당위성을 제시하였다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권34호
• /
• pp.93-127
• /
• 2014

During the four years following the sinking of the Cheonan frigate in 2010, the South Korean public opinion has seen changes in four basic ways. First, public polls with respect to the cause of the sinking show that 70% of the people consider North Korea as the culprit, while 20% maintain that it was not an act carried out by North Korea. Second, the opinions relative to the cause of the incident seem to vary according to age difference, generational difference, and educational difference. From 2011, people in their 20s showed 10% increase in regarding North Korea as the responsible party. People in their 30s and 40s still have a tendency not to believe the result of the investigation carried out by the combined military and civilian group. Third, the most prominent issue that arose aftermath of the Cheonan incident is the fact that political inclination and policy preference are influencing the scientific determination of the cause. In other words, scientific and logical approach is lacking in the process of determining the factual basis for the cause. This process is compromised by the inability of the parties concerned in sorting out what is objective and what is personal opinion. This confused state of affairs makes it difficult to carry on a healthy, productive debate. Fourth, rumors, propaganda, and disinformation generated by pro-North Korea Labor Party groups in the internet and SNS are causing considerable impact in forming the public opinion. Proposed Strategy 1. The administration can ascertain public trust by accurately determining the nature of the provocation based on accurate information in the early stages of the incident. 2. Education in scientific, logical, rational methodologyis needed at home, school, and workplace in order toenhance the people's ability to seek factual truths. 3. In secondary education, the values of freedom, human rights, democracy, and market economy must be reinforced. 4. It is necessary for the educational system to teach the facts of North Korea just as they are. 5. Fundamental strength of free democratic system must be reinforced. The conservative, mainstream powers must recognize the importance of self-sacrifice and societal duties. The progressive political parties must sever themselves from those groups that take instructions from North Korea's Labor Party. The progressives must pursue values that are based on fundamental human rights for all. 6. Korean unification led by South Korea is the genuine means to achieve peace in a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. The administration must recognize that this unification initiative is the beginning of the common peace and prosperity in the Far East Asia, and must actively pursue international cooperation in this regard.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.199-247
• /
• 2012

According to the review and analysis of medical cases that are assigned to the Supreme Court and all local High Court in 2011 and that are presented in the media, it was found that the following categories were taken seriously, medical and pharmaceutical product liability, the third principle of trust between medical institutions, negligence and causation estimation, responsibility limit, the meaning of medical records and related judgment of disturbed substantiation, Oriental doctors' duties to explain the procedures, IMS events, whether one can claim for each medical care operated by non-physician health care institutions to the nonmedical domain in the National Health Insurance Corporation, and the basis of norms for each claim. In the cases related to medical pharmaceutical product liability, Supreme Court alleviated burden of proof for accidents with medical and pharmaceutical products prior to the practice of Product Liability Law and onset the point of negative prescription as the time of damage strikes to condition feasibility of the specific situation. In the cases related to the 3rd principle of trust between medical institutions, the Supreme Court refused to sentence the doctor who has trusted the judgment of the same third-party doctors the violations of the care duty. With respect to proof of a causal relationship and damages in a medical negligence case, the Supreme Court decided that it is unjust to deny negligence by the materials of causal relationship rejecting the original verdict and clarified that the causal relationship shall not deny the reasons to limit doctors' responsibilities. In order not put burden on patients with disadvantages in which medical records and the description of the practice or the most fundamental and important evidence to prove negligence and causation are being neglected, the Supreme Court admitted in the hospital's responsibility for the case of the neonate death of suffocation without properly listed fetal heart rate and uterine contraction monitor. On the other hand, the Seoul Western District Court has admitted alimony for altering and forging medical records. With respect to doctors' obligations to description, the Supreme Court decided that it is necessary to explain the foreseen risks by the combination of oriental and western medicines emphasizing the right of patient's self-determination. However, questions have arisen whether it is realistically feasible or not. In a case of an unlicensed doctor performing intramuscular stimulation treatment (IMS), the Supreme Court put off its decision if it was an unlicensed medical practice as to put limitation of eastern and western medical practices, but it declared that IMS practice was an acupuncture treatment therefore the plaintiff's conduct being an illegal act. In the future, clear judgment on this matter should be made. With respect to the claim of bills from non-physical health care institutions, the Supreme Court decided to void it for the implementation of the arrangement is contrary to the commitments made in the medical law and therefore, it is invalid to claim. In addition, contrast to the private healthcare professionals, who are subject to redemption according to the National Healthcare Insurance Law, the Seoul High Court explicitly confirmed that the non-professionals who receive the tort operating profit must return the unjust enrichment and have the liability for damages. As mentioned above, a relatively wide range of topics were discussed in medical field of 2011. In Korea's health care environment undergoing complex changes day by day, it is expected to see more diverse and in-depth discussions striding out to the development in the field of health care.