Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Ulsenheimer

Publications and source records attributed to K Ulsenheimer.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

[The distress of guidelines].

The formulation of guidelines for our health care system is under the dictates of limited financial resources a demand of legislation and therefore a duty from which medical doctors cannot and should not free themselves. Doing so we've got to see not only the possible savings, the better information of patients and physicians, the more transparency and control, but also the negative consequences for the scope of treatment, the responsibility under civil and criminal law, i.e. the forensic risk of the physician, and for the freedom of choice and self-determination of the patient. Establishing guidelines an objective consideration of pros and cons is demanded, no euphoria but self-restraint upon the necessary with respect to the number but also the content of guidelines.

Cost Control↗
PubMed2001

[Liability of the consulting physician].

Problems of the malpractice law in telemedicine was hardly discussed until now. The consulting doctor in the centre is consulted by a "primary treating physician" to take part in treating the patient directly or indirectly. In the doctor's establishment, the consulting doctor is usually not the assistant of the "primary treating physician" and is therefore not legally responsible by contract. In hospital, the legal responsibility depends on the hospital contract-whether it is total or split. In the case of a total contract, all doctors involved in treating the patient are assistants of the hospital. In the case of a split contract, the consulting doctor has his own contract with the patient. With this premise the consulting doctor is also legally responsible for damage through a third party. In the field of communication and organization mistakes, all doctors that are involved might be legally responsible. From the view of the criminal law, the responsibility of the consulting doctor is considered regarding physical injury resulting from negligence, manslaughter through culpable negligence and denial of assistance. As the boundaries for the duty of assistance are not locally restricted but drawn with the criteria of reasonableness, telemedicine would lead to an enormous extension of the people who have the duty to help.

Consultants↗
PubMed2001

[Requirements for documentation by the physician].

Medical documentation, which is required by law, serves various purposes: for therapy, to provide information to other physicians who are or may be involved; as a record if there is any disagreement with a patient; and for invoicing purposes. Depending on which of these aspects is being addressed, the documentation is expected to satisfy different demands. With regard to liability, any information pertaining to the patient's medical condition should be recorded as soon as possible in correspondence to the principles of truth and clarity. For the health insurance companies, all treatments and services rendered must be submitted in writing. The power of proof of medical documentation is understood differently from the point of view of liability and health insurance law.

Documentation↗
PubMed2001

[How does a lawyer evaluate the introduction of a new treatment method (the so-called learning curve)].

In the interest of our patients and advancement in medicine and with the guarantee by law of the freedom to select methods of treatment, we may and must try out new strategies even in the face of initially unknown risks, side effects, and consequences. Every innovation assumes, however, that the advantages and disadvantages, potential complications, and burden to the patient have been weighed against those of conventional methods. The risks that a pioneer takes must be justified and presented comprehensively and clearly to the patient. Otherwise the threat is posed of civil and criminal accusations of negligence in responsibility or in the obligation to fully inform patients. Patient protection and safety must always be the first priority.

Diffusion of Innovation↗
PubMed2000

[Legal aspects: nonbinding recommendations or jurisdiction upon medicine?].

The freedom of therapy granted to doctors through the ages by the jurisdiction does not imply a preferred position of the doctor but lies in the interest of the patient: the doctor after thorough examination should carry out self-responsibly the therapy that is in the best interest of the patient if and as far as the patient agrees. Unfortunately, today the freedom of medical treatment is thoroughly and from multiple sides endangered. Danger derives on the one hand from the increasing influence of jurisdiction on medicine, and on the other hand, from the increasing specialization and the segregation of fields of expertise resulting therefore. Most dangerous is the multiple and subtle regulation on free medical practice of the profession by reforming the mandatory health insurance with quotas, positive lists (allowed prescriptions), fixed budgets, etc. That the doctors have substantially contribute to the erosion of freedom of therapy which also increases the risk of criminal and civil liability of the doctor by excessive support of the creation of guidelines in the recent past, is not generally acknowledged. The following should cast a little light on the missing conscience.

Budgets↗