• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[医疗事故的专家评估]

[Expert assessment of medical malpractice].

作者信息

Kluge R, Koob R

机构信息

Schlichtungsstelle der Sächsischen Landesärztekammer, Schützenhöhe 16, 01099 Dresden.

出版信息

Orthopade. 2001 Feb;30(2):117-20. doi: 10.1007/s001320050582.

DOI:10.1007/s001320050582
PMID:11276957
Abstract

Conciliation boards are advisory commissions of the medical societies. They deal with clarification of extrajudicial patient claims based on factual or putative treatment mistakes. In perhaps 90% of the cases, an extrajudicial solution is possible, whereby the federal average for recognition is 30%. Within the framework of this study, first the legal basis for the liability of doctors is explained, especially the importance of patient information and consent as well as the responsibility for documentation. The material of the conciliation board of the medical society of Saxony consists of 1375 medical expert opinions rendered between 1 January 1992 and 23 September 2000, of which 165 cases were due to orthopedic treatment. The most common health injuries resulting in compensation claims are described.

摘要

调解委员会是医学协会的咨询委员会。它们负责根据实际发生的或被认为存在的治疗失误,对患者的庭外索赔进行澄清。在大约90%的案件中,可以通过庭外解决,而联邦范围内的认可率平均为30%。在本研究框架内,首先解释了医生责任的法律依据,特别是患者信息和同意的重要性以及记录的责任。萨克森州医学协会调解委员会的材料包括1992年1月1日至2000年9月23日期间出具的1375份医学专家意见,其中165例是由于骨科治疗引起的。文中描述了导致赔偿要求的最常见健康损伤情况。

相似文献

1
[Expert assessment of medical malpractice].[医疗事故的专家评估]
Orthopade. 2001 Feb;30(2):117-20. doi: 10.1007/s001320050582.
2
[Faults and failure of tonsil surgery and other standard procedures in otorhinolaryngology].[耳鼻喉科扁桃体手术及其他标准手术的失误与失败]
Laryngorhinootologie. 2013 Apr;92 Suppl 1:S33-72. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1333253. Epub 2013 Apr 26.
3
[Medical malpractice 2000. Malpractice from the viewpoint of expert witnesses if a malpractice insurance carrier].[医疗事故2000。从专家证人角度看医疗事故(如果涉及医疗事故保险公司)]
Versicherungsmedizin. 2001 Sep 1;53(3):129-37.
4
[Medical expert assessment in civil and criminal law from the legal liability viewpoint].[从法律责任角度看民法和刑法中的医学专家评估]
Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena). 1996 Nov;90(7):589-90; discussion 591.
5
[The responsibility of settlement courts and expert commissions].[结算法院和专家委员会的职责]
Gynakologe. 1989 Dec;22(6):394-400.
6
'No fault' compensation for medical accidents.医疗事故的“无过错”赔偿
Med Sci Law. 1992 Jul;32(3):187-98. doi: 10.1177/002580249203200302.
7
[What went wrong? Analysis of Medical Malpractice Arbitration Proceedings Conducted by a German Arbitration Board after Breast Reductions].[出了什么问题?对德国仲裁委员会在乳房缩小术后进行的医疗事故仲裁程序的分析]
Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2016 Apr;48(2):101-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-103586. Epub 2016 Apr 20.
8
[Expert commissions and arbitration boards. A report of current status].[专家委员会与仲裁委员会。现状报告]
Versicherungsmedizin. 1993 Apr 1;45(2):38-44.
9
[Pioneer interventions in surgery and their legal background].
Zentralbl Chir. 1992;117(10):569-74.
10
[Medical malpractice processes--and still no end?].
Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg). 1987 Aug;66(8):397.