Schouten B C
Afdeling Sociale tandheelkunde en voorlichtingskunde van het Academisch Centrum Tandheelkunde Amsterdam (ACTA).
Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2000 Jun;107(6):238-41.
After more than 25 years of debate about the legislation of patient rights in the Netherlands, the 'Agreement on Medical Treatment' act was passed by the Dutch government in 1995. This article descibes the amount of knowledge general dental practitioners have on several topics of this law, four years after its introduction. A questionnaire was send to 806 dental practitioners, random drawn from the registers of the Dutch Dental Association. The response-rate was 41.6%. Results show that respondents are well informed about some of the most important topics of this law, such as the requirement to obtain the patient's consent to major dental treatments and the fact that information must be based on the 'patient need standard'. Other rights and duties however, are less known. For example, it is still not well known that for routine treatments the patient's explicit consent is not needed, but can be assumed. Also, knowledge about the minimal period for retaining patient dossiers is scarcely present. Some explanations for this lack of knowledge are discussed, especially the lack of relevance of some topics of this law for the dental practice.
在荷兰，关于患者权利立法的争论持续了25年多之后，荷兰政府于1995年通过了《医疗协议》法案。本文描述了在该法律出台四年后，普通牙科医生对该法律几个主题的了解程度。一份问卷被发送给从荷兰牙科协会登记册中随机抽取的806名牙科医生。回复率为41.6%。结果显示，受访者对该法律的一些最重要主题有充分了解，比如进行主要牙科治疗需获得患者同意的要求，以及信息必须基于“患者需求标准”这一事实。然而，其他权利和义务却鲜为人知。例如，人们仍然不太清楚对于常规治疗，无需患者明确同意，而是可以假定其同意。此外，对于保存患者档案的最短期限几乎没有什么了解。文中讨论了造成这种知识欠缺的一些原因，尤其是该法律的某些主题与牙科实践缺乏相关性。
