我国现阶段医患冲突的表现形式及社会学分析

医患冲突是我国现阶段医学发展过程中由医惠对角色、权利、义务、利益等方面的认识和要求出现了巨大的差距，社会诸多因素的交叉、碰撞而导致产生的一个社会问题。从社会学的角度来分析，我们发现导致这一社会现象的主要原因是：我国卫生资源的有限和卫生资源的分配不公；医方是医学资源的垄断者；医患又都是自我利益的最大追求者。依据社会学的冲突理论，从冲突的方式、程度、目标来划分，医患冲突可以分为直接冲突和间接冲突、暴力冲突和非暴力冲突、现实冲突和非现实冲突。由于间接冲突和非现实冲突的隐秘性、潜存性和对医患关系影响的深刻性，所以需要特别关注。     

生物医学研究者的利益冲突及控制

随着医学研究与产业界的密切合作,生物医学研究者面临着更多的科学道德规范与商业价值追求之间的冲突,这些冲突潜在或现实地影响到研究的客观性以及研究者“无私利性”的专业判断。本文探讨了生物医学研究者利益冲突产生的背景、影响因素及其危害,并提出利益冲突的治理对策,以期促进公众对该问题的认识,并为制定有关政策提供帮助。     

Policies on faculty conflicts of interest at US universities

CONTEXT: Despite federal regulations on faculty conflicts of interest in federally funded research, academic-industry ties are common, and evidence exists that financial considerations bias the research record. Public scrutiny of these ties is increasing, especially in cases where researchers have financial interests in the corporate sponsors of their clinical research. OBJECTIVE: To review policies on conflict of interest at major biomedical research institutions in the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey and content analysis study conducted from August 1998 to February 2000. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The 100 US institutions with the most funding from the National Institutes of Health in 1998 were initially sampled; policies from 89 institutions were available and included in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Process for disclosure, review, and management of conflicts of interest and specified management strategies or limitations, according to the institutions' faculty/staff conflict of interest policies. RESULTS: Content of the conflict of interest policies varied widely across institutions. Fifty-five percent of policies (n = 49) required disclosures from all faculty while 45% (n = 40) required them only from principal investigators or those conducting research. Nineteen percent of policies (n = 17) specified limits on faculty financial interests in corporate sponsors of research, 12% (n = 11) specified limits on permissible delays in publication, and 4% (n = 4) prohibited student involvement in work sponsored by a company in which the faculty mentor had a financial interest. CONCLUSIONS: Most policies on conflict of interest in our sample of major research institutions in the United States lack specificity about the kinds of relationships with industry that are permitted or prohibited. Wide variation in management of conflicts of interest among institutions may cause unnecessary confusion among potential industrial partners or competition among universities for corporate sponsorship that could erode academic standards. It is in the long-term interest of institutions to develop widely agreed-on, clear, specific, and credible policies on conflicts of interest. JAMA. 2000;284:2203-2208.     

Potential research participants' views regarding researcher and institutional financial conflicts of interest

BACKGROUND: Financial conflict of interest in clinical research is an area of active debate. While data exist on the perspectives and roles of academic institutions, investigators, industry sponsors, and scientific journals, little is known about the perspectives of potential research participants. METHODS: The authors surveyed potential research participants over the internet, using the Harris Interactive Chronic Illness Database. A potential research participant was defined by: (1) self report of diagnosis by a health care professional and (2) willingness to participate in clinical trials. Email invitations were sent to 20 205 persons with coronary artery disease, breast cancer, or depression; a total of 6363 persons were screened; of these, 86% or 5478 met inclusion criteria and completed the survey. The outcome measures were respondents' ratings on: importance of knowing conflict of interest information, whether its disclosure ought to be required, and its effect on willingness to participate-across seven widely discussed scenarios of financial conflicts of interest (ranging from commercial funding to equity ownership). RESULTS: Majority responded that knowing conflict of interest information was "extremely" or "very" important; a larger majority felt financial conflicts of interest should be disclosed as part of informed consent (64% to 87%). In all seven scenarios, a majority was still willing to participate but in some scenarios a sizable minority would be wary of participation. Respondents were more wary of individual than institutional conflicts of interest. Illness group and sociodemographic factors had modest effects and did not affect the main trends. CONCLUSIONS: The prevailing practice of non-disclosure of financial conflicts of interest in clinical research appears contrary to the values of potential research participants.     

如何处理临床研究中研究者的经济利益冲突?--主体、原则与方法

临床研究中研究者的经济利益冲突可能会影响到受试者的安康和研究的客观性、可靠性.我们是否应该处理这种利益冲突?应该由谁处理?根据哪些伦理原则处理?具体采取哪些措施处理?围绕这些问题,本文批判地分析了反对处理利益冲突的观点,主张研究者、研究机构、行业组织、政府部门和学术期刊多方共同努力,根据公正、有利/不伤害、尊重三个伦理原则,采取公开、管理和禁止等措施,处理研究者的经济利益冲突,以保护受试者的安康和研究的客观性.     

Professions as the conscience of society.

Ethics is no less of a science than any other. It has its roots in conflicts of interest between human beings, and in their conflicting urges to behave either selfishly or altruistically. Resolving such conflicts leads to the specification of rules of conduct, often expressed in terms of rights and duties. In the special case of professional ethics, the paramount rule of conduct is altruism in the service of a 'noble' cause, and this distinguishes true professions from other trades or occupations. If professional ethics come into conflict with national laws, the professional today can test the legitimacy of such laws by reference to internationally agreed legal standards in the field of human rights, and so help to perform the role of 'professions as the conscience of society'.     

Research, ethics and conflicts of interest.

In this paper, I have tried to develop a critique of committee procedures and conflict of interest within research advisory committees and ethical review committees (ERCs). There are specific features of conflict of interest in medical research. Scientists, communities and the subjects of research all have legitimate stakeholdings. The interests of medical scientists are particularly complex, since they are justified by the moral and physical welfare of their research subjects, while the reputations and incomes of scientists depend on the success of their science. Tensions of this kind must at times produce conflict of interest. It is important to recognise that conflicts of interest may unwittingly lead to manipulation of research subjects and their lay representatives on research committees. It is equally important to recognise distinctions between the legal and moral aspects of conflict of interest. Some practical suggestions are made which may go some way towards resolving these difficulties. They indicate what might be needed to ensure the validity of ethical discourse, and to reduce the risks associated with conflict of interest.     

Australia needs an office of academic integrity

Institutions investigating allegations of research misconduct are vulnerable to claims that their processes are inadequate or that they have an institutional conflict of interest. The Office of Research Integrity in the United States sets down standards for and reviews the adequacy of investigations of research misconduct by institutions; recognises that internal politics and the involvement of non-experts can lead to honest mistakes being regarded as serious misconduct; requires complainants and investigators to act "in good faith"; and reduces damaging publicity when complaints are misconceived or false. Australia needs an office of academic integrity to ensure that all complaints are thoroughly investigated; the investigative procedures meet international standards; fair processes are provided for complainants and respondents; and institutions are protected from claims of "cover-up" and institutional conflict of interest.     

Leukaemia in children of Jehovah''s Witnesses: issues and priorities in a conflict of care.

Throughout this paper PJ Kearney attempts to balance the risks and benefits of different approaches in paediatric oncology. Decisions have to be considered both in the short and the long term. Where religious beliefs, such as those held by Jehovah's Witnesses in relation to blood transfusions, conflict with normal medical practice the decision is often removed from the doctor, parents or patient to the courts. This sort of solution can be counter-productive, especially as good health care and subsequent recovery rely, to a large extent, on good relationships between and among the parties concerned. Destruction of these relationships, for whatever reason, often has a detrimental effect on the patient, in whose best interest everyone believes they are acting.     

Medical merchants: conflict of interest, office product sales and notifiable conduct

Professional ethical codes identify the issue of conflict of interest, which can distort doctors' objective judgements concerning the best interests of patients. Legal fiduciary duties may be owed by doctors to patients in situations of potential conflict of interest. Prescribing and dispensing functions have been largely legally separated to prevent conflicts of interest arising. The advent of integrative medicine has been accompanied by an apparent growth of in-house selling of therapeutic products. Medical merchandising constitutes a prima-facie conflict of interest and may amount to notifiable conduct under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law provisions. We believe that doctors who sell therapeutic products should adhere to strict conditions to avoid significantly departing from accepted professional standards. Doctors who have a reasonable belief that a colleague is failing to comply with these conditions could consider notifying the Medical Board of Australia.     

Are self-regulation and declaration of conflict of interest still the benchmark for relationships between physicians and industry?

Potential conflicts of interest do not imply wrongdoing, but can create bias, distort decision making, and create a perception that practitioners are being "bought "or "bribed" by industry. Transparency alone may not be sufficient to erase the doubts created when authors of clinical practice guidelines or editorials declare potential conflicts of interest. Can the subconscious obligation for reciprocation that exists when gifts are offered and accepted be fully negated? Analyses of published clinical cancer research studies have found a positive association between pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and reporting of positive outcomes, manipulation of clinical trials, and hiding of "preliminary data sets". More problematic is the issue of clinical researchers leaking preliminary results to the investment industry. Influential literature reviews and treatment guidelines have been associated with widespread declarations of conflict of interest. Some potential solutions are: regulating pharmaceutical companies to declare all gifts to clinicians, or ban such gifts; for clinicians to carefully declare potential conflicts of interest or to provide pro bono advice without accepting industry sponsorship; and for all gifts and payments from industry to academic physicians to be coordinated by an independent review committee. Journals should only allow reviews, editorials, guidelines and opinion pieces to be written by those without significant conflicts of interest.     

Deontological foundations for medical ethics?

Gillon outlines the principles of the deontological, or duty-based, group of moral theories in one of a series of British Medical Journal articles on the philosophical foundations of medical ethics. He differentiates between monistic theories, such as Immanuel Kant's, which rely on a single moral principle, and pluralistic theories, such as that of W.D. Ross, which rely on several principles that potentially could conflict. He summarizes the contributions of Kant and Ross to the development of deontological thought, then concludes his essay with brief paragraphs on other deontological approaches to the resolution of conflicting moral principles.     

Issue of fraud raised as MD self-referral comes under spotlight in Ontario.

Physician self-referral, fraud and conflict of interest are causing increasing concern in Ontario, where 100 physicians are now being investigated for such activities. These and related offences recently have been pushed to the top of the agenda of the provincial college, which recently asked physicians to vote on what kind of self-referral regulations they prefer.     

Financial Interest and Its Disclosure in Scientific Publications

Journal policies and requirements of funding agencies on financial disclosure of authors and grant applicants have divided editors and scientists who disagree on whether such policies can improve the integrity of science or manage conflicts of interest. Those opposed to such disclosure policies argue that financial interest is one of many interests held by scientists, is the least scientifically dangerous, and should not be singled out. Those who favor open reporting of financial interests argue that full disclosure removes the suspicion that something of relevance to objectivity is being hidden and allows readers to form their own opinions on whether a conflict of interest exists and what relevance that has to the study. The authors believe that the scientific community and the public will be best served by open publication of financial disclosures for readers and reviewers to evaluate.      

试论医疗服务中的冲突

医疗服务活动中存在着多种冲突,如医疗保护制度与患者知情同意权及隐私权之间的冲突、医疗风险与患者利益的冲突及医疗效果与患者就医期望值的冲突等。医疗行为的不确定性,结果的转归具有不可控性等因素决定冲突是必然存在的。此外,医务人员为规避风险采取自我保护的行为,医患双方沟通不畅等是产生冲突的主观因素。而现行的医疗制度是冲突存在的客观原因。解决冲突应从完善制度、规范行为,加强医患沟通等方面着手。     

医院伦理委员会建设若干问题的探讨

通过介绍上海几家有代表性医院的伦理委员会建设成就,阐明了我国的医院伦理委员会建设应具有自己的特点。对人才培养成为医院伦理委员会建设的瓶颈、缺乏针对伦理委员会委员的系统化培训、缺乏可操作性强的操作指南、伦理委员会的建设发展不平衡、伦理委员会的工作缺乏较高的独立性和透明度、缺乏利益冲突的管理机制等医院伦理委员会建设中存在的问题进行了探讨,提出了加快医学伦理学的人才培养、探索实行伦理委员会注册和伦理委员资格认定、尝试建立联合伦理委员会、广泛开展保护受试者和患者安全和权益的社会宣传、明确利益冲突的防范和管理原则等对策。     

冠状动脉介入治疗中的医患关系和利益冲突

目前我国冠心病介入治疗中存在着治疗不足和治疗过度两种情况,这两种情况甚至在同一所医院也同时存在.其根本原因是介入治疗中医患双方存在利益冲突,其中主要是经济利益冲突,并且有愈演愈烈之势.这由多种原因引起,包括了政策性的如卫生经济政策改革方向偏差、学科性的如医学伦理学发展滞后以及医患双方思想误区等引起.其解决办法可以通过深化卫生经济改革、建立和谐的医患关系、优化使用介入技术、坚持公正公益原则等实现.PCI中医患的利益冲突是客观存在的,怎样将利益冲突减至最小要由社会、政府管理机构、医务人员和患者共同努力完成,并且这项工作任重而道远.     

Ethical issues concerning the relationships between medical practitioners and the pharmaceutical industry

Medical practitioners and the pharmaceutical industry serve interests that sometimes overlap and sometimes conflict. There is strong evidence that associations between industry and doctors influence the behaviour of the latter in relation to both clinical decision making and the conduct of research. In view of the risk of compromising relationships with patients and the integrity of the research process, doctors must exercise care in their dealings with industry. The basic principles underlying the conduct of doctors with respect to pharmaceutical companies should be openness and transparency. Clearly articulated procedures should be developed to deal with specific issues such as travel subsidies, receipt of gifts, sponsorship of conferences and continuing education activities, and dualities of interest arising in clinical and research settings.     

Is it in a neonate's best interest to enter a randomised controlled trial?

Clinicians are required to act in the best interest of neonates. However, it is not obvious that entry into a randomised controlled trial (RCT) is in a neonate's best interest because such trials often involve additional onerous procedures (such as intramuscular injections) in return for which the neonate receives unproven treatment or a placebo. On the other hand, neonatology needs to develop its evidence base, and RCTs are central to this task. The solution posited here is based on two points. First, "best interest" is not equivalent to "the best possible interest" only to "best interest within a certain realm". The realm of deliberation when asking the title question is the neonate's health. Deliberating in this realm may involve the exclusion from consideration of some factors that might be thought relevant (such as parental wealth). Furthermore, circumstances may dictate the need to deliberate on other factors that might be thought irrelevant (such as health care resources). Second, deciding on a neonate's best interest does not involve "putting oneself in its shoes". Rather, it involves asking in what it has an interest, or stake. These will include some things in which we all, as human beings, have a stake, such as medical progress. Putting these two points together, in the realm of health the answer to whether RCT entry is in a neonate's best interest is usually very finely balanced. Where this is the case, it is reasonable to invoke a broader notion of best interest and include a broader range of elements in which the neonate has a stake, including medical progress. In this way RCT entry can, usually, be said to be in a neonate's best interest.