| 關 鍵 詞： |
同意書；吿知後同意；病人自主決定權；積極治療；舉證責任 |
| 中文摘要： |
本件病人罹患心肌梗塞與幾近休克之上消化道出血，醫師認為斯時適當之治療應採凝血處置，雖介入式心導管置放支架為積極治療心肌梗塞方式之一，惟必須使用抗凝血劑，將與上消化道出血之治療方針相衝突。病家主張醫師未告知心肌梗塞之積極治療方式致病人因反覆性心室顫動而死亡，經法院判決駁回病家之請求。本文擇舉證責任與病人自主決定權兩議題進行評析。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
consent form；informed consent；patient autonomy；aggressive treatment；burden of proof |
| 英文摘要： |
The impending shock patient was a victim of severe upper GI bleeding, and also suffered from myocardial infarction. The treating priority was decided to stop upper GI bleeding, and the cardiac catheter stenting was contraindicated then because the use of anticoagulants will deteriorate the condition of upper GI bleeding. The plaintiff claimed for damages that the physicians breached the duty of informing the patient about the aggressive treatment option of cardiac catheter stenting. The courts found for the defendant, and their opinions regarding the burden of proof and the limit of patient autonomy were discussed in details in this article.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、案件事實
貳、各審判決概要
一、地方法院
二、高等法院
三、最高法院
參、本件之評析
一、醫師就已踐行充分說明之舉證
二、醫師告知說明之範圍
肆、結語
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|