Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

W Becker

Publications and source records attributed to W Becker.

At least 595 records · Page 33Linked to original sources
PubMed1976

[Panel discussion: problems of the specialist's duty to inform the patient (author's transl)].

The obligation of the physician to inform the patient--which he has to prove in case of a suit--is based on the patient's right of self-determination. This self-decision information was subject of the panel discussion. Not discussed in detail were the information concerning diagnosis and prognosis, and the instruction of the patient regarding his conduct postoperatively and during medical treatment. Not considered was the so-called malpractice and negligence respectively. Medical liability suits are increasing for various reasons and are frequently directed at a failure to inform the patient becuase the patient is often unable to prove a negligence of the physician ("surrogate liability"). The dimension of the duty of disclosure (complete information--no information at all) is discussed in general and with special regard to the Ear-Nose- and Throat field. Special questions are answered regarding otoplasty, middle ear surgery, transplantations, extension of laryngeal surgery without prior informed consent, paranasal sinus and rhino-basis operations as well as surgery in minors and foreigners. In cases of non-vital indication and particularly in plastic-cosmetic procedures and outsider methods the requirements for informed consent are particularly important. The so-called rate of complications has perhaps a relative, but never an absolute meaning, and even this only in connection with the other circumstances of an individual case. The evidence of an adequate informed consent which must be included in a physician--patient-dialogue is most convincing by means of a written consent and the additional signature of a witness, perhaps also of the patient. The value, the problems and even the risks of an information based only on forms or brochures is discussed in detail. The panel discussion from the four points of view of the organizers should be no means confuse the otorhinolaryngologist. It should inform him about the medicolegal aspects of his activity and protect him from avoidable burdens.

Community Participation↗
PubMed1975

[Classification of skeletal neoplasms (author's transl)].

Complete documentation of the pathological spectrum of a great many similar cancer patients requires interdisciplinary coordination and the absence of ambition of any particular branch. The application of a TNM system devised by the authors for the classification of skeletal neoplasms showed in a retrospective study of 600 cases that the degree of infiltration into the periosteum and soft tissue, which opens more lymphatics to metastasizing tumor cells, is a more relevant parameter of the TNM system than the size of the tumor itself.

Bone Neoplasms↗
PubMed1975

[Bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of primary bone tumors (author's transl)].

Bone scintigraphy has improved greatly since the introduction of bone-seeing short-lived radionuclides. The main field of interest is the search for metastases into bone. The uncharacteristic accumulation of radiopharmaceutical agents in different bone lesions makes specific diagnostic evaluations unlikely. With careful selection of cases, however, scintigraphy can also be used in primary bone tumors as a supplementary means of diagnosis as well as having a positive effect on treatment. Clinical examples are presented to demonstrate the range of application of bone scintigraphy.

Bone Neoplasms↗
PubMed1975

[Panel discussion: problems of the specialist's duty to inform the patient (author's transl)].

The obligation of the physician to inform the patient -- which he has to prove in a case of a suit -- is based on the patient's right of self-determination. This self-decision information was subject of the panel discussion. Not discussed in detail were the information concerning diagnosis and prognosis, and the instruction of the patient regarding his conduct postoperatively and during medical treatment. Not considered was the so-called malpractice and negligence respectively. Medical liability suits are increasing for various reasons and are frequently directed at a failure to inform the patient because the patient is often unable to prove a negligence of the physician ("surrogate liability"). The dimension of the duty of disclosure (complete information -- no information at all) is discussed in general and with special regard to the Ear-Nose- and Throat field. Special questions are answered regarding otoplasty, middle ear surgery, transplantations, extension of laryngeal surgery without prior informed consent, paranasal sinus and rhinobasis operations as well as surgery in minors and foreigners. In cases of non-vital indication and particularly in plastic-cosmetic procedures and outsider methods the requirements for informed consent are particularly important. The so-called rate of complications has perhaps a relative, but never an absolute meaning, and even this only in connection with the other circumstances of an individual case. The evidence of an adequate informed consent which must be included in a physician -- patient-dialogue is most convincing by means of a written consent and the additional signature of a witness, perhaps also of the patient. The value, the problems and even the risks of an information based only on forms or brochures is discussed in detail. The panel discussion from the four points of view of the organizers should by no means confuse the otorhinolaryngologist. It should inform him about the medicolegal aspects of his activity and protect him from avoidable burdens.

Ethics, Medical↗