Treatment of six months of aggravation of the disease "tongue cancer" misdiagnosed as "mouth sores" patients claim 440,000!

Medical law Hui case brief Ms. Yan because of "infertility", 4 years repeatedly repeatedly in the A hospital Chinese medicine office. during
due to ulcers under the lower left tongue was diagnosed by the doctor as a mouth sore, the doctor in addition to only visual observation of the affected area, did not take any additional means of auxiliary examination, and asked for a vegetarian diet and a ban on dinner, six months later infertility and mouth sores are not cured.
her condition worsened, Ms. Yan went to Hospital B, was diagnosed with tongue cancer, and later admitted to Hospital C for surgery.
severe language disorders, eating disorders, double upper limb movement dysfunction, head and neck movement restriction, etc. , Ms. Yan's disability level is five.
, Ms. Yan believes that Hospital A in the medical process of fault, resulting in serious physical damage, sued the court to ask A Hospital compensation for various losses totalling more than 440,000 yuan.
court proceedings, the court entrusts the judicial appraisal center to carry out the judicial appraisal of medical fault, causation and participation.
the appraisal opinion that Ms. Yan in the A hospital to receive treatment activities, A hospital there is no duty of care, diagnosis and treatment is not standardized, lack of medical records, failure to inform the obligation and other faults, this fault and Ms. Yan tongue cancer failed to diagnose early, failed to treat the damage consequences of the cause of the cause of the main, participation is proposed to be 55%-65%.
court of first instance held that when Ms. Yan visited A Hospital, A Hospital should give timely and correct treatment in accordance with the law and medical norms, and should bear the corresponding liability if there is a fault in the medical conduct of A Hospital.
Now the forensic identification center to make an appraisal conclusion, confirmed that the A hospital is at fault, it should bear the corresponding economic losses of Ms. Yan proportionally, the proportion of 60% is more appropriate, the judgment of the A Hospital to compensate Ms. Yan for various losses totalling 420,000 yuan.
A hospital did not appeal, it believes that the case involves Chinese medicine medical behavior, and the appraists do not have the qualifications of Chinese medicine, there is no chinese medicine education background, by an expert with only Western medicine qualifications, knowledge and skills to evaluate purely Chinese medicine problems, lack of scientific and impartial, should choose an accreditation body with the ability of Chinese medicine medical behavior identification to carry out the appraisal.
court of second instance held that A hospital advocated that the accreditation institutions and apprases should have chinese medicine qualifications or relevant academic background, have no legal basis, do not support, the judgment rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
Legal brief analysis in recent years on misdiagnosis caused by medical disputes, and the reasons for easy misdiagnosis are as follows: incomplete medical history information and the cause is not clear, can not timely respond to the progress and symptoms of the disease and signs, etc. ;
if a misdiagnosis occurs, the patient is harmed and the medical institution is liable for the damage.
judicial appraisal refers to the activity in which the appraiser uses science and technology or expertise to identify and judge the specialized issues involved in the litigation and provide the appraisal opinion.
judicial appraisal procedure refers to the general term of the way, step and relevant rules of judicial appraisal institutions and judicial experts to carry out judicial appraisal activities.
accordance with the relevant provisions of the General Provisions of the Judicial Identification Procedure, after accepting the entrustment of the appraisal, the judicial appraisal institution shall designate the judicial appraisee of the institution who has the qualification to practise the appraisal matter for identification.
the judicial expert has completed the appraisal, the judicial appraisal institution shall appoint the person with the corresponding qualification to review the appraisal procedure and appraisal opinion.
The General Rules of Judicial Accreditation Procedure also provide that, in one of the following cases, the judicial appraisal institution may accept the entrustment of the case-handling organ for re-identification: (1) the former judicial expert does not have the qualification to practise the entrusted appraisal matters; (2) the original judicial appraisal institution organizes the appraisal beyond the registered business scope; (3) the original judicial appraisal institution shall avoid the case-handling organ if it considers that it needs to be re-identified; (5) other circumstances prescribed by law.
After the implementation of the Tort Liability Law, the proof rules of medical damage liability disputes return to the origin of "who claims and who gives evidence", and if the patient claims the liability of the medical institution in accordance with article 54 of the Tort Liability Law, he or she shall, in addition to the evidence of medical institution's medical treatment and damage, submit evidence that there is a causal relationship between the medical institution and its medical personnel's fault, diagnosis and treatment behavior and damage.
Again, if the medical party claims not to be responsible, it should prove that the patient does not cooperate with the medical party in carrying out diagnosis and treatment in accordance with the norms of diagnosis and treatment, medical personnel in the rescue of patients in critical conditions such as patients who have fulfilled reasonable medical obligations, and limited to the level of medical treatment at that time difficult to diagnose and treat evidence.
the case, the patient had completed the burden of proof by applying for judicial appraisal, and the medical party questioned the qualifications of the appraization officer, but did not provide evidence to support his claim and did not meet the circumstances of the re-identification.
Practice medicine", such as near the abyss, such as thin ice", medical personnel in the work of a little carelessness, it may cause disability, or even life-threatening, so medical work can not be half sloppy and indistethed.
the Civil Code of the Basic Health Care and Health Promotion Law, which has been promulgated and implemented by the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Procedure, the norms of medical institutions will become more stringent.
Medical institutions in the medical treatment activities, we must strict laws and regulations, departmental regulations, industry regulations and other provisions, seriously, standardized practice, to avoid the failure to pay attention to the obligations, negligence and other medical disputes leading to legal risks.
(this article is original medical law, based on the real case adaptation, in order to protect the privacy of the parties are using a real name)