Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
No-fault Compensation System (no-fault + compensation_system)
Selected AbstractsAnalysis of birth-related medical malpractice litigation cases in Japan: Review and discussion towards implementation of a no-fault compensation systemJOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH (ELECTRONIC), Issue 4 2010Nana Uesugi Abstract Aim:, We examined birth-related malpractice civil litigation cases in Japan to clarify the actual status related to the implementation of an obstetrical no-fault compensation system in 2009. Material & Methods:, In this retrospective review, we analyzed legal and medical information from 64 cases with a delivery date after 1987 and a judgment date between April 1997 and March 2007. Results:, The malpractice claim was accepted in 44 cases and rejected in 20 cases. The period from the delivery to the judgment date was lengthy (90.1 months overall). The average amount of damages awarded was ¥97 810 000 for cases of cerebral palsy (CP). Preterm births and less than 2500 g infants represented a higher incidence rate in the rejected cases. There were 32 cases (50.0%) with CP, 18 (28.1%) with infant death, 10 (15.6%) with neonatal death, and 4 (6.3%) with fetal death. Twenty-three of 44 accepted cases (52.3%) and 11/20 rejected cases (55.0%) had a gestational age of more than 33 weeks at birth and weighed more than 2000 g. Forced deliveries were performed in 45/64 cases (70.3%), and augmentation/induction of labor was performed in 28/64 cases (43.8%). There were 13/16 (81.3%) accepted cases that underwent vacuum and/or forceps extraction after labor augmentation/induction. Conclusions:, More than half of our cases could be sufficient for a no-fault compensation system in Japan. Though the system is considered to have some problems that need to be solved, this finding suggests that many children and their families may benefit from the new system without having to file. [source] Impact of cost containment measures on medical liabilityJOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, Issue 6 2006S. Callens PhD Abstract Rationale, Owing to the growing health care expenditure and the need to improve efficiency, public authorities have since the 1980s changed their policy with respect to health care. Financial pressures encouraged them to investigate methods to control health care costs. One recent method is the enactment of cost containment measures based on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that provide financial or administrative sanctions. Aims and objectives, This article describes the legal value of CPGs, the evolution towards cost containment measures based on CPGs, and finally the legal value of these new cost containment measures. It questions whether these measures may have an impact on the medical liability rules and it wants to open the debate on the legal value of these measures based vis-à-vis the professional autonomy of the physician and patients' rights on quality care. Methods, The research for this article is based on a comparative analysis of the legal literature and jurisprudence of a number of legal systems. Results and Conclusions, The article concludes that, as a result of the rising costs, it becomes increasingly difficult for a physician to balance his duty to take care on the one hand and his duty to control costs on the other. Maintaining a high standard of care towards patients becomes difficult. Consequently, one wonders whether the law should then allow the standard of care to be adjusted according to the available means. Until now, courts in a fault based system have not been willing to accept such an adjustment of the standard of care, but it might well be possible that this attitude will change in case of no-fault compensation systems. [source] | ||||||||||