Oomen Robert J A, Biesaart Monique C I H
UMCU, Julius Centrum voor Gezondheidswetenschappen en Eerstelijns Geneeskunde, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2012;156(49):A5269.
Investigation into the considerations taken into account by the central and regional disciplinary tribunals for the health service (CTG and RTG) in cases where a doctor was permanently removed from the national professional register.
Retrospective study of jurisprudence and literature.
A search was carried out for jurisprudential cases in which doctors were removed from the professional register during the period January 2006-December 2011, using the following sources: the websites of the disciplinary tribunals, the Dutch Government Gazette (Staatscourant) and two journals concerned with healthcare law. The verdicts were analysed, general statistical records were kept and categories for the consideration were set up on the basis of short, characteristic quotations from the verdicts. These verdicts were subsequently re-examined and divided into these categories.
A total of 34 verdicts concerning 13 different physicians were found in the study period. There were 17 verdicts from the RTGs and 16 verdicts from the CTG. One verdict was pronounced by the Medical Supervisory Board (CMT). In 12 cases the final verdict was permanent removal from the professional register. In one case the CTG imposed a lower sanction than that earlier imposed by the RTG. The most common considerations taken into account by removal from the professional register were the combination of medical-technical errors, incomplete and/or inaccurate maintenance of patient records and the doctor's attitude towards his or her own actions.
Removal from the professional register is rarely imposed. In most cases, an accumulation of obvious errors is involved. Improper sexual behaviour is also punished severely. Acting in accordance with professional medical standards, adequate medical record-keeping and self-reflection are important factors in the prevention of this sanction.
调查中央和地区卫生服务纪律法庭（CTG和RTG）在医生被永久吊销国家职业注册资格的案件中所考虑的因素。
对判例法和文献的回顾性研究。
利用以下来源，搜索2006年1月至2011年12月期间医生被吊销职业注册资格的判例法案件：纪律法庭网站、荷兰政府公报（《国家公报》）以及两份医疗保健法相关期刊。对判决进行分析，保存一般统计记录，并根据判决中的简短、典型引述设立考虑因素类别。随后对这些判决进行重新审查并归入这些类别。
在研究期间共发现34份涉及13名不同医生的判决。其中RTG有17份判决，CTG有16份判决。一份判决由医疗监督委员会（CMT）作出。12起案件的最终判决是永久吊销职业注册资格。1起案件中，CTG施加的处罚比RTG先前施加的处罚轻。吊销职业注册资格最常考虑的因素是医疗技术失误、患者记录维护不完整和/或不准确以及医生对自身行为的态度。
极少实施吊销职业注册资格的处罚。大多数情况下，涉及明显错误的累积。不当性行为也会受到严厉惩罚。符合专业医疗标准、妥善保存医疗记录和自我反思是预防这种处罚的重要因素。
