中日医生对医疗纠纷的思考

IF 1.3 Q3 ETHICS Asian Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5
Hua Xu, Yining Ruan, Taketoshi Okita, Masao Tabata, Yasuhiro Kadooka, Atsushi Asai
{"title":"中日医生对医疗纠纷的思考","authors":"Hua Xu,&nbsp;Yining Ruan,&nbsp;Taketoshi Okita,&nbsp;Masao Tabata,&nbsp;Yasuhiro Kadooka,&nbsp;Atsushi Asai","doi":"10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Physician–patient disputes are a major problem in healthcare. Physician–patient conflicts, workplace violence, and direct involvement in disputes have a significant negative impact on the well-being of physicians. China and Japan have similar cultures but differing healthcare systems. The present study aimed to examine and compare the experiences and perceptions of Chinese and Japanese physicians regarding medical disputes. Qualitative descriptive content analysis was performed for 18 cases from each country to assess the major issues involved in each case and their impact on the physicians. Common issues in medical disputes for both countries included monetary motives of patients and/or families, violence/threats from patients and/or families, the inability of patients and/or families to understand the risk of complications, and the uncertainties of medicine. The serious impact of medical disputes on the mental health and professionalism of physicians was also an issue shared by physicians of both countries. There were, however, differences in the magnitude and frequency of these issues between the two countries. Pre-existing distrust of physicians among patients and/or families was noted only by Chinese physicians, and insufficient information disclosure by physicians was noted only by Japanese physicians. In conclusion, there were similarities and differences between the two countries in the perceptions of physicians regarding medical disputes. Our analysis revealed differing healthcare situations due to cultural and institutional differences as well as universal problems intrinsic to medicine. Based on our results, we propose several key principles to improve the physician–patient relationship.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections from Chinese and Japanese Physicians on Medical Disputes\",\"authors\":\"Hua Xu,&nbsp;Yining Ruan,&nbsp;Taketoshi Okita,&nbsp;Masao Tabata,&nbsp;Yasuhiro Kadooka,&nbsp;Atsushi Asai\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Physician–patient disputes are a major problem in healthcare. Physician–patient conflicts, workplace violence, and direct involvement in disputes have a significant negative impact on the well-being of physicians. China and Japan have similar cultures but differing healthcare systems. The present study aimed to examine and compare the experiences and perceptions of Chinese and Japanese physicians regarding medical disputes. Qualitative descriptive content analysis was performed for 18 cases from each country to assess the major issues involved in each case and their impact on the physicians. Common issues in medical disputes for both countries included monetary motives of patients and/or families, violence/threats from patients and/or families, the inability of patients and/or families to understand the risk of complications, and the uncertainties of medicine. The serious impact of medical disputes on the mental health and professionalism of physicians was also an issue shared by physicians of both countries. There were, however, differences in the magnitude and frequency of these issues between the two countries. Pre-existing distrust of physicians among patients and/or families was noted only by Chinese physicians, and insufficient information disclosure by physicians was noted only by Japanese physicians. In conclusion, there were similarities and differences between the two countries in the perceptions of physicians regarding medical disputes. Our analysis revealed differing healthcare situations due to cultural and institutional differences as well as universal problems intrinsic to medicine. Based on our results, we propose several key principles to improve the physician–patient relationship.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44520,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-024-00294-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医患纠纷是医疗领域的一个主要问题。医患冲突、工作场所暴力以及直接参与纠纷对医生的健康产生了严重的负面影响。中日两国文化相似,但医疗体系不同。本研究旨在考察和比较中日两国医生在医疗纠纷方面的经历和看法。我们对两国的 18 个案例进行了定性描述性内容分析,以评估每个案例所涉及的主要问题及其对医生的影响。两国医疗纠纷的共同问题包括患者和/或家属的金钱动机、患者和/或家属的暴力/威胁、患者和/或家属无法理解并发症的风险以及医学的不确定性。医疗纠纷对医生心理健康和职业精神的严重影响也是两国医生共同面临的问题。然而,两国在这些问题的严重程度和发生频率上存在差异。只有中国医生注意到患者和/或家属对医生预先存在不信任,只有日本医生注意到医生信息披露不足。总之,两国医生对医疗纠纷的看法存在异同。我们的分析表明,由于文化和制度上的差异,以及医学固有的普遍问题,两国的医疗状况各不相同。根据分析结果,我们提出了改善医患关系的几项关键原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reflections from Chinese and Japanese Physicians on Medical Disputes

Physician–patient disputes are a major problem in healthcare. Physician–patient conflicts, workplace violence, and direct involvement in disputes have a significant negative impact on the well-being of physicians. China and Japan have similar cultures but differing healthcare systems. The present study aimed to examine and compare the experiences and perceptions of Chinese and Japanese physicians regarding medical disputes. Qualitative descriptive content analysis was performed for 18 cases from each country to assess the major issues involved in each case and their impact on the physicians. Common issues in medical disputes for both countries included monetary motives of patients and/or families, violence/threats from patients and/or families, the inability of patients and/or families to understand the risk of complications, and the uncertainties of medicine. The serious impact of medical disputes on the mental health and professionalism of physicians was also an issue shared by physicians of both countries. There were, however, differences in the magnitude and frequency of these issues between the two countries. Pre-existing distrust of physicians among patients and/or families was noted only by Chinese physicians, and insufficient information disclosure by physicians was noted only by Japanese physicians. In conclusion, there were similarities and differences between the two countries in the perceptions of physicians regarding medical disputes. Our analysis revealed differing healthcare situations due to cultural and institutional differences as well as universal problems intrinsic to medicine. Based on our results, we propose several key principles to improve the physician–patient relationship.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.
期刊最新文献
Opening Access to the Bioethics Spectrum An Ethical Analysis of the Online Content of Assisted Reproductive Technology Centers in Bangladesh Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion on Editorial Boards of Medical Student Journals Reflections from Chinese and Japanese Physicians on Medical Disputes The Effectiveness of a Hospital Ethics Committee in a Non-Western Country: Lessons from a Ten-Year Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1