• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.95-117
• /
• 1999

The purposes of the study was to analysis the factors on the physicians' indemnity experience and indemnity on malpractice. Data was collected from mail interview for the physicians from August, to October in 1996. Questions were asked to the physician who selected with random sample(n=8.338) about the opinion of malpractice insurance. experience that he(she) have requested the indemnity from patience. context of experienced indemnity and demographic characteristics of physician and patience. Response rate is 37.5%(n=3,124). This study was analyzed in two levels' the first. influential factors on whether physician has experience of indemnity and the second. influential factors of indemnity among physicians who had experienced the indemnity. The major findings were as follows : 1. Logistic regression on whether physicians had experience of indemnity request was conducted. And it indicated that statistically meaningful variables of model 1 (about all physicians) were department of surgery, physicians who have intention of insurance fee, physician age and income, physicians who owned the hospitals and statistically meaningful variables of model 11 (about physicians who owned the hospital) were department of surgery and internal treatment. 2. Multiple regression on the influential factors on indemnity was conducted. And it showed that statistically meaningful variables in model 1 were method of malpractice quarrel(physician association), whether physician had malpractice, whether suit succeeded, physician age, average practice time and income and whether physician owned the hospital and statistically meaningful variables of model 11 were whether physician had malpractice, number of outpatient, number of beds. As the conclusion, the thesis was examined about the variables related with experience of indemnity and cost of malpractice. But in order to prevent malpractice and promote medical quality, the reasonable system to solve a malpractice have to settle and cost estimation on malpractice is essential. Therefore an advanced research is progressed with methodology to decide the indemnity bases.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제17권3호
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2007

Relative value scales introduced in 2001 remarkably improved health insurance fee schedule, but current relative value scales have many problems. In the beginning the government intended to introduce 'resource based relative value scales(RBRVSs)' like USA, but political adjustment of RBRVS studied in 19.17 weakened the relationship between relative value scale and resource consumption. So unbalance of health insurance fees are existing till now. Also relative value was not divided to physician work and practice expense, and malpractice fee was not divided separately. To correct the unbalance of current relative value scales, the refinement project of health insurance relative value scales started in 2003. The project team divided relative value scales into three components, which are physician work, practice expense, malpractice fee. Physician work was studied by professional organizations like Korean medical association. To develop the practice expense relative value, project team organized clinical practice expert panels(CPEPs) composed of physicians, nurses, and medical technicians. CPEPs constructed direct expense data like labor costs, material costs, equipment costs about each medical procedures. The practice expense relative values of medical procedures were developed by the allocation of the institution level direct & indirect costs according to CPEPs direct costs. Institution level direct & indirect costs were collected in 21 hospitals, 98 medical clinics, 53 dental clinics, 78 oriental clinics, and 46 pharmacies. The malpractice fee relative values were developed through the survey of malpractice related costs of hospitals, clinics, pharmacies. Putting together three components of relative values in one scale, the final relative values were made. The final relative values were calculated under budget neutrality by medical departments, that is, total relative value score of a department was same before and after the revision. but malpractice fee relative value scores were added to total scores of relative values. So total score of a department was increased by the malpractice fee relative value score of that department This project failed in making 'resource based' relative value scales in the true sense of the word, because the total relative value scores of medical departments were fixed. However the project team constructed the objective basis of relative value scale like physician's work, direct practice expense, malpractice fee. So step by step making process of the basis, the fixation of total scores by the departments will be resolved and the resource based relative value scale will be introduced in true sense.

• 한국도서관정보학회지
• /
• 제33권4호
• /
• pp.179-207
• /
• 2002

본 논문은 각종 도서관 및 정보센터에서 사서로 활동하거나, 독자적으로 혹은 기관에 소속되어 정보중개인으로 활동하는 정보전문가가 직무범위 내에서 정보봉사를 할 때, 주의의무를 태만히 하여 오류정보 와 불충분한 정보 등을 제공함으로써 이용자에게 손해를 입히는 과오행위에 관한 연구이다. 과오행위가 성립되기 위한 필수적 요소와 이를 회피하기 위한 대처방법에 대해 구체적으로 다루었다.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제1권1호
• /
• pp.72-94
• /
• 1991

The number of disputes between physicians and patients caused by medical malpractice are showing a sharp increasing over the past several years. The disputes on medical malpractice may be resolved either in court or by direct negotiation between both sides concerned. There are no special acts relating to the civil or penal liability of the physicians in Korea. The medical disputes are decided merely through legal technicalities and without reference to actual medical practice. The current system which does not compensate injured patients adequately or equitably leads to taking a long time consuming for dispute resolution processes. The things make worsed, the problem is due to not being of insurance system or a proper funds for compensation. This research proposes a outline of new and comprehensive alternative for these problems and failure of conventional resolution of medical disputes. So far, we have learned lessons from the excperiencies of resolving medical malpractice disputes of Japan and the United States. The proposal first calls for an administrative arbitration and pretrial screening panels as a condition precedent to trial. The proposal also includes to facilitate with the funds for compensating the injured.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• 제29권1호
• /
• pp.62-62
• /
• 2016

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제61권4호
• /
• pp.474-477
• /
• 2018

Objective : From November 30, 2016, the Korean Government carried the revised Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act into effect. Mediation will start automatically without agreements of the defendant, when the outcome of the patient was death, coma more than a month or severe disability. Cerebral aneurysm has a definite risk of bad outcome, especially in the worst condition. Any surgical intervention to this lesion has its own high risk of complications. Recently, Seoul central district court decided 50% responsibility of the doctors who made a rupture of the aneurysm during coiling (2015Ga-Dan5243104). We reviewed judicial precedents related to cerebral aneurysms in lawsuit using a web search. Methods : We searched judicial precedents at a web search of the Supreme Court, using the key words, "cerebral aneurysm". Results : There were 15 precedents, six from the Supreme Court, seven from the High Court, and two from district courts. Seven precedents were related to the causation analysis, such as work-relationship. Five precedents were malpractice suits related bad results or complications. Remaining three precedents were related to the insurance payment. In five malpractice precedents, two precedents of the Supreme Court reversed former two precedents of the High Court. Conclusion : Judicial precedents on the cerebral aneurysm included not only malpractice suits, but also causation analysis or insurance payment. Attention to these subjects is needed. We also need education of the independent medical examination. To avoid medical disputes, shared decision making seems to be useful, especially in cases of high risk condition or procedures.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한예방의학회 2000년도 제52차 추계학술대회 연제집
• /
• pp.195-196
• /
• 2000

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제53권2호
• /
• pp.82-95
• /
• 2015

Background: Interest in medical malpractice claims and accidents is a day-to-day social issue to general public as well as medical personnel. Related laws and regulations already have been established, and institutions based on the laws and regulations also have been founded. However, in our dental community, interest and response to the issue seem insufficient. Methods: We searched four medical literature databases that are mainly cited in the medical community. Keywords including 'dental malpractice claims', 'patient safety' and 'medical accident' were used for the search. Among the selected literatures, we chose specific ones separately whose content is authentic and easily approachable. Results: Medical malpractice claims and accidents tend to increase around the world. As the cost or the difficulty level of surgery increases, the dispute rate also increases, which appears even more apparent in developed countries. Preventive measures to prevent the disputes and accidents are not significantly different. Three critical of them include relationship of doctor with patient, the informed consent and medical record. Conclusion: Tools for accident occurrence or communication improvement have been introduced. All of those cost time and money. However, education or professional request of liability insurance companies, self-education and provision of guidelines can be immediately implemented. To implement those, dentists' promotion at the regional or national level is imperative. rhBMP-2 is widely used at sinus augmentation, alveolar bone defect, and socket preservation.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.254-264
• /
• 2015

Background: Pain medicine often requires medico-legal involvement, even though diagnosis and treatments have improved considerably. Multiple guidelines for pain physicians contain many recommendations regarding interventional treatment. Unfortunately, no definite treatment guidelines exist because there is no complete consensus among individual guidelines. Pain intervention procedures are widely practiced and highly associated with adverse events and complications. However, a comprehensive, systemic review of medical-dispute cases (MDCs) in Korea has not yet been reported. The purpose of this article is to analyze the frequency and type of medical dispute activity undertaken by pain specialists in Korea. Methods: Data on medical disputes cases were collected through the Korea Medical Association mutual aid and through a private medical malpractice liability insurance company. Data regarding the frequency and type of MDCs, along with brief case descriptions, were obtained. Results: Pain in the lumbar region made up a major proportion of MDCs and compensation costs. Infection, nerve injury, and diagnosis related cases were the most major contents of MDCs. Only a small proportion of cases involved patient death or unconsciousness, but compensation costs were the highest. Conclusions: More systemic guidelines and recommendations on interventional pain management are needed, especially those focused on medico-legal cases. Complications arising from pain management procedures and treatments may be avoided by physicians who have the required knowledge and expertise regarding anatomy and pain intervention procedures and know how to recognize procedural aberrations as soon as they occur.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.163-199
• /
• 2005

치의학계에서는 의료사고를 일으킬만한 중환자나 응급환자의 빈도가 상대적으로 낮아 의료분쟁에 휘말리는 경우가 적었기 때문에, 이에 대하여 비교적 안전지대로 인식되어 왔다. 그러나 요즈음은 남의 일로 보아 넘기기에는 어려울 정도로 의료분쟁이 증가하고 있다. 이런 연유로 최근에 이르러서는 비교적 다양한 의료사고와 분쟁에 관한 연구가 이루어지고 있으며, 적당한 대처를 위하여 관련된 사항을 분석하고 있으나, 자료가 부족한 실정이다. 본 연구는 2004년 현재 서울시치과의사회 소속 개원치과의사 3684명중, 설문지가 회수된 1882명을 연구대상으로 하며, 치과의사를 대상으로 하는 의료배상책임보험이 시행되고 있는 최근의 개원 치과에서 일어나는 의료사고 및 분쟁의 실태와, 일반적인 치과의사들의 의식을 분석하고, 전체적인 흐름을 파악하여 향후대책의 자료를 제시하는 것을 연구목적으로 한 것으로 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 응답자의 98.47%가 향후 의료사고 및 분쟁 발생에 대한 의구심을 가졌다. 2. 응답자의 27.42%가 의료분쟁을 경험하였으며, 전공의 수련여부와 의료분쟁 경험률 사이에는 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 3. 의료사고 중 치주.보존 관련 사고가 20.50%로 가장 높았으며, 임프란트 관련사고도 6.17%로 나타났다. 4. 응답자의 43.02%만이 치료 전 충분히 설명을 하였으며, 환자의 정확한 동의없이 치료를 시작하는 경우도 25.90%로 나타났다. 5. 설명 및 동의를 시행하지 않아 의료분쟁이 발생한 것은 16.55%이며, 의무기록 관련자료가 부족하여 문제해결에 어려움을 당한 경우는 10.26%로 나타났다. 6. 응급조치를 시행할 수 있다고 생각하는 경우는 49.73%였으며, 이중 정확한 지식을 갖춘 경우는 23.60%로 나타났다. 7. 의료분쟁 발생시 88.09%가 치과의사에게 조언을 구하였으며, 또한 단체로는 구치과의사회에 주로 자문을 구했다. 8. 의료분쟁과 관련하여 소비자보호원으로부터 자료 제출 요구를 받은 경우는 5.26%로 나타났으며, 이들 중 75.61%는 이에 성실히 대응하였다. 9. 의료분쟁을 해결한 후 83.63%는 비교적 안정적인 심리상태를 회복하였다. 10. 응답자의 99.46%가 의료분쟁처리기구가 필요하다고 느꼈으며, 78.58%는 매우 시급하다고 생각하였다. 11. 66.70%의 치과의사가 의료분쟁 경험이 없이도 의료배상책임보험에 가입하였다. 그러나 응답자의 73.36%는 이 상품에 대하여 잘 몰랐으며, 가입자의 93.36%는 분쟁처리과정을 잘 알지 못했다. 12. 79.00%의 응답자가 의료배상책임보험에 가입한 후에는 의료분쟁이 발생하여도 당황스러우나 가입 이전보다는 비교적 안심할 수 있다고 느끼고 있었다. 13. 의료배상책임보험에 의한 분쟁의 해결시 치과의사는 71.92%가 보통이상으로 만족하였으나, 환자는 35.61%만이 만족하였다. 14. 의료배상책임보험의 보완점으로 53.22%가 분쟁의 신속한 해결을 위해서 보험사, 의사, 환자 모두가 합의 유도에 동참해야 한다고 생각하였으며, 또 29.08%의 응답자가 합의과정에서 환자측의 업무방해를 보험사에서 방어해 주기를 바라고 있었다. 이상의 결과들을 볼 때 증가하는 의료분쟁에 대한 인식을 제고하고 이에 대한 교육 및 해결 장치의 보완이 필요할 것으로 사료된다.