[CONFIDENTIALITY OF ADVERSE EVENTS INVESTIGATIONS - THE PRESENT STATUS AND WHAT IS NEEDED].

Introduction: The goal of the medical staff is to provide proper, effective and efficient treatment to the patient and to take care of his well-being. An error in medical care that causes a serious outcome or mortality, can be considered negligence when the caregiver did not meet the requirements of a reasonable physician for reasonable care and did not take the necessary precautions in providing the treatment, in light of the information available to him. The perception of punishment and compensation due to harm, caused to a patient as a result of a medical error, changed dramatically over the years. Starting with direct and severe punishment according to Hammurabi laws and ending with the "no fault" approach that is accepted widely in some countries. Following an adverse event that occurred in medical treatment, a process should be conducted in order to draw lessons to reduce the likelihood of recurrence of similar incidents in the future, by answering 4 questions: What happened? How did it happen? Why did it happen? and What should be done to prevent similar incidents in the future? The Patient Rights Act does not suggest conducting a safety investigation but recommends an examination board in cases of negligence or error in treatment. By law, the protocols of the examination board are confidential and can be removed by the court in case the protocol contains evidence of importance that is unlikely to be found in the medical record. Lack of confidentiality may cause medical staff to be reluctant of conducting a safety investigation due to fear of using its findings for a lawsuit or appointing an examination board whose conclusions will be reported to the victim and his family. The "no fault" method overcomes these barriers by enabling a thorough safety investigation and has important professional, economic and social aspects with a direct impact on the quality and safety of treatment. The method expands the accessibility of victims to compensation, reduces the number of claims and the burden on the courts. Among additional benefits are transparency and consistency in decisions, promoting patient safety due to physicians' willingness to report failures, reduction in "defensive medicine" and spending in the health care system.