法医学杂志

法医学杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (2): 158-165.DOI: 10.12116/j.issn.1004-5619.2022.220105

所属专题： 医疗损害鉴定专题

• 医疗损害鉴定专题 • 上一篇    下一篇

医疗损害鉴定模式调查

田甜1(), 张旭东2, 云利兵1, 李明3, 董贺文4, 刘宁国4, 刘敏1()   

  1. 1.四川大学华西基础医学与法医学院，四川 成都 610041
    2.山西医科大学法医学院，山西 太原 030000
    3.黄南藏族自治州公安局，青海 黄南 811399
    4.司法鉴定科学研究院 上海市法医学重点实验室 司法部司法鉴定重点实验室 上海市司法鉴定专业技术服务平台，上海 200063
  • 收稿日期:2022-01-14 发布日期:2022-04-25 出版日期:2022-04-28
  • 通讯作者: 刘敏
  • 作者简介:刘敏，男，教授，主要从事法医病理学教学、科研和鉴定；E-mail：min8liu@hotmail.com
    田甜（1993—），女，博士研究生，主要从事法医病理学研究；E-mail：13620619303@163.com

Research on the Identification Model of Medical Damage

Tian TIAN1(), Xu-dong ZHANG2, Li-bing YUN1, Ming LI3, He-wen DONG4, Ning-guo LIU4, Min LIU1()   

  1. 1.West China School of Basic Medical Sciences and Forensic Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
    2.School of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030000, China
    3.Huangnan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture Public Security Bureau, Huangnan 811399, Qinghai Province, China
    4.Shanghai Key Laboratory of Forensic Medicine, Key Laboratory of Forensic Science, Ministry of Justice, Shanghai Forensic Service Platform, Academy of Forensic Science, Shanghai 200063, China
  • Received:2022-01-14 Online:2022-04-25 Published:2022-04-28
  • Contact: Min LIU

RichHTML

199

PDF (PC)

767

摘要： 目的

了解医生、患者及司法鉴定人群体对我国医疗纠纷现状及医疗损害鉴定的认知，探究更有利于医疗纠纷解决的医疗损害鉴定模式。

方法

设计调查问卷，随机抽取2019年4—11月四川省和重庆市的在职临床医生、司法鉴定人及住院患者进行调查，使用SPSS 22.0软件对各项调查结果数据进行统计分析。

结果

相较于患者（24.92%），医生（61.72%）认为目前医患关系比以前更紧张；医患双方均更倾向于选择自愿协商和人民调解的医疗纠纷解决途径；司法鉴定人对医疗卫生相关法律法规的认知程度最高，医生次之，患者最低；66.72%的医生、78.41%的患者认为需要进行医疗损害鉴定，且更倾向于委托司法鉴定机构；不同群体均认为司法鉴定人和医生应共同参与鉴定，80.94%的医生认为应由鉴定机构对鉴定意见负责，而非鉴定人负责。

结论

建议医学会和司法鉴定机构应在双方现有基础上取长补短，制定基本统一的医疗损害鉴定规则。建议规范医疗损害司法鉴定机构和鉴定人行为，以提高自身鉴定水平，并在鉴定中积极邀请临床医学专家会诊，推进司法鉴定的规范化、科学化。

关键词: 法医学, 医疗纠纷, 医疗损害, 鉴定模式, 问卷调查法, 四川, 重庆

Abstract: Objective

To understand the perceptions of doctors, patients and forensic examiners on the current situation of medical disputes and medical damage identification in China, and to explore the medical damage identification model that is more conducive for the resolution of medical disputes.

Methods

A questionnaire was designed, and in-service clinicians, forensic examiners and inpatients in Sichuan Province and Chongqing City were randomly selected from April to November 2019. SPSS 22.0 software was used to analyze the data of various survey results.

Results

Compared with patients （24.92%）, doctors （61.72%） believed that the current doctor-patient relationship was more tense than before; both doctors and patients were more inclined to choose voluntary consultation and people’s mediation to resolve medical disputes; forensic examiners have the highest level of cognition of medical and health-related laws and regulations, followed by doctors and patients; 66.72% of doctors and 78.41% of patients believed that medical damage identification was necessary, and they were more inclined to entrust forensic identification institutions; different groups all believed that forensic examiners and doctors should participate in the identification together, 80.94% of doctors believed that the appraisal institutions should be responsible for the forensic opinion, not the appraiser.

Conclusion

It is suggested that the Medical Association identification and forensic identification should learn from each other and formulate basic unified rules for the identification of medical damage. It is suggested to standardize the behavior of medical damage forensic identification institutions and appraisers, to improve their own appraisal level, actively invite clinical medical experts for consultation in identification, and promote the standardized, scientization of forensic identification.

Key words: forensic medicine, medical dispute, medical damage, appraisal model, questionnaire investigation approach, Sichuan, Chongqing

中图分类号: