J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1994 Sep-Oct;28(5):439-43.
There is a duty to use available information for the general good where this can be done without detriment. It is, in principle, ethically acceptable to use personal medical records without approaching or involving the patients concerned, provided that confidentiality and anonymity are preserved; such use does not require independent ethical approval provided that confidentiality is assured and subject to safeguards described below. Epidemiologists have a special interest in the use of personal medical records in their work (in this context the use of health-related registers and existing biological samples may be included), though access to such data involves professional staff in all medical specialties, not only those in epidemiology. The following guidance is based on a report of a working group (which included non-medical members) to the Royal College of Physicians Committee on Ethical Issues in Medicine. Activities such as medical audit, epidemiological surveillance, inquiries designed to establish indices of morbidity and mortality and outbreak investigations all constitute medical practice and as such do not require independent ethical review. Research involving access to medical records, health-related registers, or existing biological samples only, without direct patient involvement, requires neither explicit individual patient consent nor independent ethical review provided that: a) explicit consent to access a person's records is obtained either from official custodians of the records (who have a duty to satisfy themselves as to the bona fides and competence of the investigator) or from the patient's clinician: the decision to access personal medical information should not be left to the sole discretion of the investigator.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在不造成损害的情况下,有责任为了公众利益利用现有信息。原则上,在确保保密和匿名的前提下,不经相关患者同意或不涉及他们而使用个人医疗记录在伦理上是可接受的;只要确保保密并遵循以下所述的保障措施,这种使用不需要独立的伦理批准。流行病学家对在其工作中使用个人医疗记录特别感兴趣(在这种情况下,可能包括使用与健康相关的登记册和现有的生物样本),尽管获取此类数据涉及所有医学专业的专业人员,而不仅仅是流行病学专业人员。以下指南基于一个工作组(包括非医学成员)向皇家内科医师学院医学伦理问题委员会提交的一份报告。诸如医疗审计、流行病学监测、旨在建立发病率和死亡率指标的调查以及疫情调查等活动均构成医疗实践,因此不需要独立的伦理审查。仅涉及获取医疗记录、与健康相关的登记册或现有生物样本而不直接涉及患者的研究,在以下条件下既不需要患者明确的个人同意,也不需要独立的伦理审查:a)从记录的官方保管人(他们有责任自行确定调查人员的诚意和能力)或患者的临床医生处获得访问某人记录的明确同意:访问个人医疗信息的决定不应完全由调查人员自行决定。(摘要截选至250字)