• 대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.89-93
• /
• 2007

조영제를 사용한 방사선과 검사의 조영제 부작용에 대한 위험성은 잘 알려져 있으며, 조영제의 부작용을 줄이기 위한 연구도 지속적으로 진행되어 왔다. 또한 조영제 부작용에 대한 사전검사를 하더라도 조영제에 의한 치명적 부작용을 예측하기 어렵다. 이러한 조영제 부작용에 대한 법적책임에 대하여 최근에는 의료기관개설자의 책임이 중요시되고 있다. 의료기관은 환자의 건강을 목적으로 하는 조직체이다. 그리고 조직체는 그 구성원에 의한 과실에 책임이 있다. 그러므로 의료기관개설자는 의료서비스에 대해서 기대가능한 모든 노력을 하여야 하며, 불충분 또는 불완전한 조직편성 및 진료조치가 이루어지지 않게 하여야 할 조직의무를 부담한다. 이러한 점에서 의료기관은 방사선조영검사시에 조영제를 주입하는 단계로부터 검사의 완료에 이르기까지 전과정에 충분하고도 완전한 조직편성과 적정한 진료 확보를 위한 제반조치를 취할 책임이 있다. 따라서 환자의 안전과 진료의 적정을 위하여 의료기관이 조직적으로 필요한 조치를 시행하지 않거나 불충분한 경우에는 불법행위법상 의료기관 독자적인 조직책임을 지게 되며, 의료기관의 조직의무위반은 의료기관 자신의 책임이므로 내부관계에서 의료기관종사자 개인에게 구상권을 행사할 수 없다.

• 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.

• 간호행정학회지
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.113-136
• /
• 1999

There are some new trends in judgments concerning medical malpractice. which include emphasis on medical professionals' explanation duty in order to materialize patient's rights of self-determination. Now, patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject, participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is no limited to nurses in advanced practice: it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital, a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to indentify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's due care, especially in nursing malpractice. To clarify nurses' due care. chapter II has focused on nursing behavior and the scope of nursing practice based on the medical law and health care related study results. Chapter III deals with the content and scope of nurse's due care. Generally. negligence is defined as not doing something which a resonable person. guided by those ordinary considerations which or dinarily regulate human affairs. would do. or doing something which a resonable and prudent man would not do. Next. it describes how we can set the standard of due care in nursing practice. There is objective factors and subjective factors. And we also discuss about the limitation of due care in nursing practice. Finally. chapter IV deals with the case studies related to nursing negligence in the situation of determination. Now', patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is not limited to nurses in advanced practice; it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital. a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However. there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to identify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's intravenous injection. post operation nursing care. blood transfusion. and patient nursing care. The result of this paper is as follows. First. there are several cases dealing with nurse's negligence in nursing practice. however, those cases didn't judge nurse's due care based on individual -specific standard but general-objective standard. Second, there is a tendency to put an emphasis on the principal of belief to distinguish who has the liability in the case of medical malpractice among medical care team. So nurses shoud practice nursing care more actively to protect themselves and patients because there is an effort to form professional nurse system and the scope of nursing practice will be deeper and broader. Third, standard of care is a necessary element in establishing negligence. If a nurse is able to meet the standard of care, no breach will be found.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• 제43권3호
• /
• pp.278-283
• /
• 2016

Background Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical malpractice. In this study, we reviewed trends in precedents involving cosmetic surgery-related medical disputes, with the goal of helping to prevent unnecessary disputes in the future. Methods We conducted a search of the judgments made in South Korean courts between 2000 and 2013 that were related to the field of plastic surgery. A total of 54 judgments were analyzed, and the selected precedents were reviewed and classified according to the kind of negligence involved. Results The claim amounts ranged from under 8 million KRW (6,991 USD) to 750 million KRW (629,995 USD). The most common ratio of the judgment amount to the claim amount was 20%-30%. The judgments were classified according to the following categories: violation of the duty of explanation in 17 cases (29%), violation of the duty of care in 10 cases (17%), violation of both duties in 20 cases (35%), and no violation of duty in six cases (10%). Conclusions Cosmetic surgery-related suits require different approaches than general malpractice suits. The Supreme Court requires plastic surgeons to determine the type, timing, methods, and scope of their treatments when considering possible results. Therefore, practitioners should be educated on their rights and responsibilities to enable them to cope with any possible medical dispute that may arise.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• 제43권5호
• /
• pp.318-323
• /
• 2017

Objectives: Mandibular angle reduction or reduction genioplasty is a routine well-known facial contouring surgery that reduces the width of the lower face resulting in an oval shaped face. During the intraoral resection of the mandibular angle or chin using an oscillating saw, unexpected peripheral nerve damage including inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) damage could occur. This study analyzed cases of damaged IANs during facial contouring surgery, and asked what the basic standard of care in these medical litigation-involved cases should be. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a total of 28 patients with IAN damage after mandibular contouring from August 2008 to July 2015. Most of the patients did not have an antipathy to medical staff because they wanted their faces to be ovoid shaped. We summarized three representative cases according to each patient's perceptions and different operation procedures under the approvement by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University. Results: Most of the patients did not want to receive any further operations not due to fear of an operation but because of the changes in their facial appearance. Thus, their fear may be due to a desire for a better perfect outcome, and to avoid unsolicited patient complaints related litigation. Conclusion: This article analyzed representative IAN cutting cases that occurred during mandibular contouring esthetic surgery and evaluated a questionnaire on the standard of care for the desired patient outcomes and the specialized surgeon's position with respect to legal liability.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.129-149
• /
• 2016

Medical dispute means the dispute between the hospital and the patient due to a medical accident. In general, medical accidents must be in accordance with the terms that are used in the medical dispute adjustment method stated in Article 2 (definition). In relation to this, there is a need to discuss an efficient operation scheme for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in medical disputes. In addition, it is necessary to look at issues of civil liability and criminal liability. In particular, in the consumer dispute arbitration committee, there is a case to make a "decision not to adjust" in aggressive intervention in the process of conflict resolution. The medical staff, on the basis of its "decision," can use this as a proven material for civil and criminal cases. This is rather upon the determination of the consumer council as a typical side effect to defend the user's perspective. This is the "decision" as was expressed from an order, "not adjusted." It is also determined to be easy and clearly timely. In the medical litigation, it is requesting the burden of proof of a patient's cause-and-effect relationship with the doctors committing negligence and medical malpractice. This seems to require the promotion of legislation in the direction to reduce future cases. It is determined that the burden of proof of medical accidents must be improved. The institution receiving the medical accident should prevent a closure report. Further, it is necessary to limit the transition to a franchise point. In this paper, we understand the problems of the current medical dispute resolution system, trying to establish a medical dispute resolution system desirable through an efficient alternative. In addition, it wants help in the protection and realization in medical consumers' and patients' rights. The relevant authorities will take advantage of these measures. After all, this could contribute to the system for a smooth resolution of a medical dispute.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.217-260
• /
• 2013

In connection to the civil liability of the medical malpractice, plaintiff and courts are solving the medical disputes with theory of the liability based on tort law. because contract law does not enact the right of claim of solatium and a plaintiff's lawyer and courts hesitate to use contract law. Medical treatment of doctor is main debt in medical contract and its in-complete performance gives rise to the violations of human's life, body and health. Consequently a breach of medical contract leads to violations of person-al rights. These violations spring from liability of contract as well as tort and damages from them are recognized based on medical contract law. A duty of explanation of doctor is a independent and appendant debt to the treatment debt. However its breach provokes violations of human's life, body and health as well as a right self-determination. Therefore consolation money claim should be recognized. In case of the violation of patient's life, body and health, patient's family al-so can demand consolation money due to the violation of their's own mental pain. However in case of the violation of only patient's self-determination without informed concent, they can not demand it by reason of the violation of patient's self-determination. But by reason of the violation of patient's life, body and health that were recognized by proximate causal relation between violation of duty of explanation and abd execution, they can do.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.227-251
• /
• 2014

In current law, the premium medical treatment system gives patients the right of choice between normal medical treatment service and premium medical treatment service. Only the doctors having a career more than a certain period of time fixed in the law are eligible for providing the premium medical treatment service. So, the premium medical treatment system is highly related to the patients' right to know and the right of self-determination. The system is also relevant to the so-called 'economic explanation' notion because patients should pay additional fee when they want to use this system. Meanwhile, the situation as follows is problematic as to this system. Although a patient applied for using the premium medical treatment system and the patient also chose his or her own doctor specifically, another doctor who was not selected as premium doctor could make a medical accident. Then, is the another doctor liable for damages because the accident was a medical malpractice or a breach of medical contract? In this study, we are going to examine the problems related with the premium medical treatment system. First, we examine the current law related to the system. Second, we look into the economic explanation duty and its application to the premium medical treatment system. Finally, we examine a real judgment case about a medical practice against the premium medical treatment system and we propose our solution to this case.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.3-40
• /
• 2018

예전부터 일본에서 의료사고가 형사사건으로 취급되는 경우는 드물었다. 하지만 요코하마시립대학병원과 같은 중대한 의료과오가 발생한 이후 검사가 의료과오를 기소하는 태도를 보이고 있다. 의료사고는 의료관계자간 역할분담의 형태가 과실 인정에서 중요한 하나의 요소가 된다. 요코하마시립병원사건에서는 환자의 동일성확인에 관하여 의료관계자 사이에 역할분담이 확립되지 않은 경우에는 관계자 전원이 환자의 동일성을 확인하여야 할 의무가 있다고 하였다. 또 사이타마 의과대학병원사건에서는 치료에 신중할 필요가 있는 중대한 증례에 관해서는 그 증례를 담당하는 주치의 뿐 만 아니라 대학병원의 과장도 치료방침에 관하여 확인할 의무가 있다고 하였다. 현립 오오노병원사건에서 무죄판결이 내려진 이후는 형사소추에 신중을 기할 필요가 있다는 목소리가 강해지고 있다. 이러한 상황 속에서 후생노동성은 의료사고방지를 위해 의료사고조사제도를 도입하여 의료사고에 제3자기관에 의한 검증의 강화를 도모하고 있다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.3-46
• /
• 2017

의사의 설명의무는 의사가 환자에게 이미 시행한 의료행위, 시행 중인 의료행위 및 장래에 시행할 의료행위와 환자의 요양상 수칙에 관하여 적극적 체계적으로 진술함으로써 환자가 그 내용을 인식하게 할 법적 의무를 총칭한다. 이 의무는 환자의 알 권리에 대응하는 보고성 설명의무, 환자의 동의권 거절권에 대응하는 기여성 설명의무, 요양지도성 설명의무로 나뉜다. 설명의무를 분류하는 것은 각각의 기능과 법적 성질이 다르고, 법적 성질이 다름에 따라 그 위반 시의 효과, 특히 손해배상책임의 대상과 범위가 달라지기 때문이다. 이 주제에 관하여 우리나라에서는 지난 40년 가까운 기간 동안 많은 이론의 발전이 있었고, 그를 토대로 대법원 판결의 논리도 상당히 정치하게 전개되어 왔다. 그러나 여전히 학계와 실무계 일각에서는 용어와 개념의 혼동, 학설과 판례 논리에 대한 이해 부족을 목격하게 되고, 심지어 대법원 판결문 내의 전후 문맥에서 그리고 관련 있는 복수의 판례 사이에서 논리와 이론의 불일치를 발견하게 되는 것이 사실이다(이것은 합리적 근거와 설득력을 지닌 견해의 분립을 지적하는 것이 아니다). 위와 같은 견해와 문제의식을 기초로 해서, 의사가 부담하는 설명의무의 기능별 분류와 법적 성질 및 그 위반 시의 효과를 우리나라 학설과 판례를 중심으로 분석 정리한다.