Editorial hold key to medical disputes

2014 has 115,000 cases of medical disputes. Despite the shocking figures, but because of statistical difficulties, probably also underestimated the severity. In these disputes, resulted directly from health care workers percentage of personal injury cases is very low, but their wide dissemination, frustrated enough to make health care personnel, and long term, is not conducive to patient welfare. n the logic of the tax reduction

For patients and their families, however, in the event of malpractice not only suffer the medical consequences, then when the accident investigation, liability and claims, intangible but also could face enormous institutional barriers.

In 2002, began the implementation of the provisions of the regulations on the handling of medical accidents medical malpractice chaired by the Government agencies in charge of health investigation and treatment, the medical society to investigate the medical malpractice and medical reports issued. Public hospitals but is mainly involved in the dispute, and the Government sponsors and managers of public hospitals, the provision of impartiality to be questioned. There are also concerns that, by clinical doctor of medicine to conduct anonymous identification is possible to shield the peer. This coupled with the lack of administrative and legal remedies, not only easy to make family clashed because of desperate, and professional "MDP" calculated.

National Health Planning Commission trying to update regulations to deal with the increasingly serious situation, recently submitted to the State Council of the medical disputes prevention and Management Ordinance (draft), and open to the public for comment.

Draft the most striking changes is to remove the "compensation of medical accident" chapter, presented to commercial insurance to improve the medical malpractice liability mechanism, also suggested that the Government authorities are no longer directly for civil compensation of medical dispute treatment, but through patient negotiation, mediation and judicial proceedings and other channels, widening the channel for resolving disputes.

We appreciate these changes. Also noted with regret that, in terms of critical medical malpractice, embodied in the draft effort is far from enough.

In case of medical malpractice, medical evaluation is the determination of the nature and responsibility allocated premises, consultations, mediation and the key pieces of evidence, apparently lies at the heart of health care. Many suggestions in its identification of medical accidents, should be merged and forensic medical identification and implementation of open, transparent, real-name identification procedures. Draft nothing confusing in that regard. In our view, hold the core issues of medical expertise, establish social confidence in the professional medical evaluation, is the key to the alleviating conflicts between doctors and patients.