25년 동안의 안과 관련 의료소송
Litigations in Ophthalmology for 25 Years in Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
목적: 안과와 관련된 의료분쟁에서 피고의 특성, 법원의 판단결과와 손해배상금액 등을 분석하고자 하였다. 대상과 방법: 1989년부터 2014년까지 국내 안과 관련의료소송 중 판결이 종결된42건의 판례를 판례 검색 웹사이트를 통해 수집하였다. 결과: 최종 분석된 안과 관련 소송 결과는 원고 일부 승 26건, 기각 16건이었다. 피고 병원 유형은 의원 22건, 상급종합병원 16건, 병원 6건이었다. 전체 소송의 판결금액은 총액 1,770,466,250원이었으며 평균 66,743,168원(5,000,000원-455,869,936원)이었다. 평균 청구 금액은 녹내장 분야가 223,788,608원으로 가장 많았다. 손해배상 청구의 62%가 설명의무위반으로 인한 정신적 손해에 대한위자료 지급이었다. 의사가 배상한 경우는 망막 분야가 70% (7/10)로 가장 비율이 높았다. 1심 판결에 불복하여 2, 3심으로 진행된경우는 성형안과 분야가 가장 높았다(4/4). 의사가 배상한 판례 중 8건(62%)은 검사 및 진단행위 과실, 3건(23%)은 처치행위 과실, 1건(9%)이 마취 및 회복과정의 과실로 판결되었다. 결론: 의원이 가장 많이 피소되었고, 62%에서 원고가 일부 승소하였다. 의사의 배상 이유로 설명의무 위반과 검사 및 진단행위 과실이가장 많아 이를 인지하는 것이 환자와 의사의 안전을 도모하고 의료 소송을 줄이는 데 도움이 되겠다.
Abstract
Purpose: To analyze the characteristics of defendants, court rulings and the compensation received in medical disputes relating to ophthalmology. Methods: Retrospective analyses of ophthalmic claims obtained from websites between 1989 and 2014 were performed. Results: Among 42 cases, 26 cases were ruled partially in favor of plaintiffs and 16 cases, ruled in favor of the defendant. Regarding the type of hospital, private clinics accounted for 22 claims, tertiary referral hospitals took 16 claims, and the secondary hospitals took 6 claims. The judgment amount of all of the lawsuits was ￦1,770,466,250 and average amount was ￦66,743,168 (￦5,000,000-￦455,869,936). The condition with the highest mean payment per claim was glaucoma (￦223,788,608). The consolation money for emotional distress due to violation of liability for explanation comprised a large proportion of the compensation, accounting for 62% of total payment. The conditions most likely to result in payment were those related to the retina, which occurred in 7 cases (70%). The conditions most likely to be appealed to a higher court were those involving oculoplasty (100%). Mismanagement of tests and misdiagnosis occurred in 8 cases (62%), mismanagement of treatment occurred in 3 cases (23%), and mismanagement of anesthesia and recovery occurred in 1 case (9%). Conclusions: Among all claims, those involving private clinics were most commonly involved (52%) and 62% of all claims were decided partially in favor of plaintiffs. Violation of liability during the explanation of the condition and negligence during the act of diagnosis and treatment were significant reasons for payment. Examination of these cases will help to promote patient safety and reduce repeated medical disputes.
참고문헌 (12)
- Jeong YY., "An inducement problem on the principle liability without fault in a legislative bill of injury and relief in a medical accident", Korean Soc Law Med Semi, 7, pp.271~310 (2006)
- Kim BI., "Status and problems of medical disputes by ADR", Chungnam University Legal Research, 16, pp.240~ (2005)
- Mathew RG., "Clinical negligence in ophthalmology : fifteen years of national health service litigation authority data", Ophthalmology, 120, pp.859~864 (2013)
- Ali N., "A decade of clinical negligence in ophthalmology", BMC Ophthalmol, 7, pp.20~23 (2007)
- Cook TM., "Litigation related to anaesthesia : an analysis of claims against the NHS in England 1995-2007", Anaesthesia, 64, pp.706~718 (2009)
- 이미선, "소아안과 영역에서 발생한 의료소송의 판례 분석", 한방안이비인후피부과학회지, 25(3), pp.78~87 (2012), 대한한방안이비인후피부과학회[DOI]
- "Information of Life Law"[URL]
- Lee JK., "A study on negligence and comparative negligence in medical malpractice", Inha University Graduate School of Law, 8, pp.85~89 (2005)
- Ambady N., "Surgeons’ tone of voice : a clue to malpractice history", Surgery, 132, pp.5~9 (2002)
- Levinson W., "Physician-patient communication : the relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons", JAMA, 277, pp.553~559 (1997)
- "Good Medical Practic" (1998)[URL]
- Brick DC., "Risk management lessons from a review of 168 cataract surgery claims", Surv Ophthalmol, 43, pp.356~360 (1999)