购买医师责任保险是推行多点执业的必备条件

医师从事诊疗活动无论是单点执业还是多点执业都难免产生医患纠纷,甚至会出现需要赔偿的医疗损害。既往医师单点执业过程中若患者在诊疗活动中受到损害,医疗机构及其医务人员有过错的一般由医疗机构承担赔偿责任,医师多点执业后若仍采用这一赔偿模式则明显不利于这项惠民政策的实施。建议将医师个人购买医师责任保险作为"强制性"条款纳入到多点执业医师与另一医疗机构所签署的合同或协议中,通过医师责任保险化解异地执业时的医疗损害赔偿责任。     

国家卫生计生委：医师多点执业试点工作必须确保医疗质量和安全

国家卫生计生委宣传司司长、新闻发言人毛群安在今年7月30日接受媒体采访时表示,医师多点执业试点工作必须确保医疗质量和安全,并对医师的执业行为进行有效监管。国家卫生计生委鼓励和关注各地积极探索试点,并将适时总结经验,逐步建立符合国情的医师多点执业管理制度。     

医师多点执业的困境问题研究

医师多点执业自2009年实施以来取得了一些成绩,但对于医师多点执业涉及的各方而言,实施中确实存在一些问题和困境.只有解决了这些问题和困境,完善风险分担机制,保障各方合法权益,才能更好地推动医师多点执业的发展.     

浅议医师多点执业背后的法律风险

医师多点执业试点工作推开后,全国各地试点城市均出现了"叫好不叫座"、"遇冷"的问题,究其原因在于医师多点执业背后潜存着非常多的法律风险,本文针对这些法律风险进行了分析研究,并在此基础上提出完善建议。     

医师与第二执业医疗机构的法律关系探讨

医师多点执业作为医改的一个亮点,对医疗体制的改革有着重要的意义。但由于立法的滞后,推广效果仍不尽人意。本文试从劳动法的角度,对医师多点执业的性质进行探讨,以求进一步明晰其本质关系。     

医师多点执业背后的法律风险及防范

我国医师多点执业自试点推行以来,虽叫好声不断,但是效果却不尽如人意,背后面临的法律风险是阻碍其实施的重要原因。本文通过对这些法律风险进行分析,并提出有效防范措施,希望促进我国医师多点执业顺利推行。     

《关于推进和规范医师多点执业的若干意见》解读

2014年11月5日,国家卫生计生委、国家发展改革委、人力资源社会保障部、国家中医药局和中国保监会联合印发了《关于推进和规范医师多点执业的若干意见》(以下简称《若干意见》)。现对有关要点解读如下:总体要求:推进和规范医师多点执业,应当立足我国国情,借鉴国际有益经验,做到管放结合,积极稳妥。《若干意见》提出以下总体要求:一是推进医师合理流动。通过放宽条件、简化程序,优化政策环境,     

我国全科医生制度法制化初论

执业医师制度改革是我国医疗卫生体制改革的重要组成部分。如何对执业医师进行科学划分并配置符合其特点的制度安排,将对我国目前正在积极探索的执业医师的签约首诊制度、转诊分级医疗制度和多点执业制度产生积极影响。美、英、德等国的全科医生制度各具特色,其中符合市场经济发展规律的规则值得我国效仿。我国全科医生制度主要依靠国家政策推进,上海和深圳全科医生试点也暴露出一些问题。全科医生制度＂政策推进型＂模式应当逐渐被＂法制推进型＂模式取代,完善《执业医师法》是我国全科医生制度法制化的理想选择。     

海峡两岸对非法医疗行为法律管制之比较研究

<正>一、前言大陆[执业医师法]所称之医师包括执业医师和执业助理医师,执业助理医师应当在执业医师的指导下依执业类别执业,但在乡镇的医疗、预防、保健机构中,可独立从事一般的执业活动,大陆[执业医师     

非法行医的认定和法律责任

依照执业医师法的规定,医师必须通过医师资格考试取得医师资格,并经所在地卫生行政部门批准注册发给医师执业证书后,方可从事相应的医疗、预防、保健业务,未经医师注册取得执业证书不得从事医师执业活动。医师法还规定,个体行医的执业医师须经注册后在医疗、预防、保健机构中执业满五年,并须按照国家有关规定办理审批手续,未经批准不得行医。根据医师法和有关法规规定,医师执业应符合下列条件:1、医师资格考试成绩合格,经所在地卫生行政部门准予注册并发给医师执业证书,按照所注册的执业地点、执业类别、执业范围从事相应的医疗、预防、保健业务。执业注     

Privacy Act of 1974; system of records--HCFA

HCFA is proposing to revise the systems notice for the "Medicare Physician Identification and Eligibility System (MPIES)," System No. 09-70-0525. The following alterations will be made to this system of records: 1. The purpose statement for the system will be revised to better reflect the system's expanded function. The new purpose of this system of records will read as follows: "to maintain unique identification of each physician, practitioner, and medical group practice requesting and/or receiving Medicare reimbursement." 2. The name of the system will be changed from the "Medicare Physician Identification and Eligibility System (MPIES)," to the "Unique Physician/Practitioner Identification Number (UPIN) System." 3. The name of the "Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN)" will be changed to the "Unique Physician/Practitioner Identification Number." Despite this amendment, the acronym UPIN will not be changed because Federal and state agencies and private and public insurance entities are familiar with the use of this acronym. 4. The structure of the UPIN identifier is being changed from a 6-digit identifier to a 10-digit identifier so as to uniquely identify all physicians, practitioners and medical group practices, and to rectify current problems with existing individualized identification systems. 5. Tax identification numbers will be collected and added to the data fields maintained on all physicians, practitioners, and medical group practices in this system. 6. HCFA is also proposing to add a new routine use (number 10) to this system notice for the release of data to other Federal and state agencies.     

Medicare program; payment policies under the physician fee schedule, five-year review of work relative value units, clinical laboratory fee schedule: signature on requisition, and other revisions to part B for CY 2012. Final rule with comment period

This final rule with comment period addresses changes to the physician fee schedule and other Medicare Part B payment policies to ensure that our payment systems are updated to reflect changes in medical practice and the relative value of services. It also addresses, implements or discusses certain statutory provisions including provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively known as the Affordable Care Act) and the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) of 2008. In addition, this final rule with comment period discusses payments for Part B drugs; Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule: Signature on Requisition; Physician Quality Reporting System; the Electronic Prescribing (eRx) Incentive Program; the Physician Resource-Use Feedback Program and the value modifier; productivity adjustment for ambulatory surgical center payment system and the ambulance, clinical laboratory, and durable medical equipment prosthetics orthotics and supplies (DMEPOS) fee schedules; and other Part B related issues.     

日本医师会医师赔偿责任保险制度介评

始建于1973年的日本医师会医师赔偿责任保险制度,经过近40年的发展,已成为日本医疗事故纠纷解决体系中的不可或缺的机制。该制度的实施不仅为医师供给了价格低廉的保险产品,还为医疗事故纠纷的解决提供便捷渠道。尽管这一制度还不尽完善,但这并不妨碍我们从中汲取经验和启示。     

The POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) paradigm to improve end-of-life care: potential state legal barriers to implementation.

The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) Paradigm is designed to improve end-of-life care by converting patients' treatment preferences into medical orders that are transferable throughout the health care system. It was initially developed in Oregon, but is now implemented in multiple states with many others considering its use. An observational study was conducted in order to identify potential legal barriers to the implementation of a POLST Paradigm. Information was obtained from experts at state emergency medical services and long-term care organizations/agencies in combination with a review of relevant state law.     

大兴区借助行刑衔接机制治理非法行医情况分析简

目的：了解大兴区非法行医治理现状,为制定整治对策提供依据。方法：对2011-2012年大兴区非法行医整治工作情况进行综合分析。结果：2年间共取缔427户次,立案处罚151起、移送公安机关追究其刑事责任12人、申请法院强制执行93起,与行刑衔接开展前相比差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01、〈0.05）,综合治理使得非法行医初步得到遏制。结论：借助行刑衔接机制,初步解决了在打击非法行医工作中经常遇到的调查取证难、行政处罚与执行难等一系列制约卫生行政执法的难题。应将行政处罚作为目前治理非法行医的有效手段,以提高办案质量与效率和案件移送的成功率为切入点,及时将那些明知故犯、无视病人生命与健康权而再次非法行医者绳之以法。     

Physician Participation in Executions: Care Giver or Executioner?

The "medicalization" of the death penalty has ignited a debate, by those within the medical profession and by others outside it, about the appropriateness of physicians participating in state-sponsored executions. Physicians participating as "agents" of the State in executions argue that their presence ensures a more humane execution. Opponents argue physician participation violates the Hippocratic Oath which states clearly that physicians should never do harm to anyone. How any physician, who is dedicated to "preserving life when there is hope," can argue that taking the life of a healthy person because the state commands it is in the patient's best interest, and does not conflict with the goals of medicine is beyond comprehension. Physician participation in executions is unethical because it violates the four basic principles that govern medical ethics: respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.     

医疗损害鉴定主体改革刍议

医疗损害鉴定主体,包括鉴定机构及鉴定人,是医疗损害鉴定制度改革的起点。医疗事故鉴定模式中的专家组并不是鉴定主体,但其合议制的实质对鉴定结论的科学性具有重要作用,应予保留。应改革鉴定结论形成机制,允许出具多样化的鉴定结论。医疗损害鉴定制度的改革应采取司法行政部门主管、司法鉴定机构组织鉴定工作、医学会推荐鉴定人的模式。由于医学的专业性极强,鉴定人应当来自于现任专职医务人员。在保证鉴定人中立性、公正性的同时,要重视保证医务人员参与鉴定工作的积极性。     

医学生对医疗损害法律制度的认知现状调研

为了提高医学生的法律意识,谨慎地对待患者的生命权与健康权,防范医疗纠纷和医疗事故的发生。本文以《侵权责任法》医疗损害责任制度及相关卫生法规为切入点,评估医学院校学生对医疗损害法律制度的认知现状,对学生进行医学法学知识测评和问卷调查,结果表明,学生对法律条文的理解与临床实践存在很大差异,在校生与实习生、西医类专业与中医类专业学生医学法学成绩存在显著差异,实习可有效提高学生的认知。本研究提示,学生对医疗损害法律制度的认知不足与教师卫生法学知识的不足、学时有限、医学与法学课程缺乏学科间的交叉整合、缺少复合型师资、专业类别等密切相关。     

Privacy Act of 1974; systems of records--HCFA. Notice of proposed new routine use for an existing system of records

HCFA is proposing to add a new routine use to the "Medicare Physician Supplier Master File," HHS/HFCA/BPO, No. 09-70-0516, to permit the release of the Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) to entities that bill for services they performed upon order or referral from a physician.     

医疗损害鉴定主体改革刍议

医疗损害鉴定主体,包括鉴定机构及鉴定人,是医疗损害鉴定制度改革的起点。医疗事故鉴定模式中的专家组并不是鉴定主体．但其合议制的实质对鉴定结论的科学性具有重要作用,应予保留。应改革鉴定结论形成机制,允许出具多样化的鉴定结论。医疗损害鉴定制度的改革应采取司法行政部门主管、司法鉴定机构组织鉴定工作、医学会推荐鉴定人的模式。由于医学的专业性极强,鉴定人应当来自于现任专职医务人员。在保证鉴定人中立性、公正性的同时,要重视保证医务人员参与鉴定工作的积极性。