Ever since the advent of pediatric vaccination, individuals have expressed concerns about both its risks and benefits. These concerns have once again resurfaced among some segments of the population and could potentially undermine national vaccination programs. The views of the public, however, must be considered and respected in the formulation of vaccination policy. We have conducted an analysis of the pediatric vaccination "debate" in the Canadian context. We believe that there is common ground between those who support pediatric vaccination and those who are concerned about these programs. Based on our findings, we believe that the goal of public health authorities should be to maintain trust in vaccines by continuing to meet certain reciprocal responsibilities. To do so, we recommend the following: 1) increased investment in adverse event reporting systems; 2) request for proposals for consideration of a no-fault compensation program; 3) developing pre-emptive strategies to deal with potential vaccine risks; 4) further examination of mechanisms to improve communication between physicians and parents concerned about vaccination. All of these approaches would require additional investment in pediatric vaccination. However, such an investment is easy to justify given the benefits offered by pediatric vaccination and the ramifications of failing to maintain confidence in vaccination programs or missing a vaccine-related adverse event.
Comment In: Can J Public Health. 2006 Mar-Apr;97(2):86-916619991
Management of patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract or pancreas (GEP-NENs) poses diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This study described the medico-legal claims reported to a national governmental system that oversees compensation to patients with GEP-NENs Materials and Methods: An electronic search of the Norwegian System of Compensation to Patients database was performed to identify claims evaluated between 2005-2016. The clinical information and the medico-legal evaluation were reviewed.
We identified seven patients, five women and two men, with a median age of 57 (range=47-73) years. Delayed diagnosis (median diagnostic delay of 18 (range=6-48) months) was the main cause for claims in six out of the seven patients). Four patients received financial compensation based on the claim judgement.
This review of claims that were evaluated by the Norwegian System of Compensation to Patients showed that a timely diagnosis of GEP-NENs remains a clinical challenge.
Following two years of negotiations, the insolvent Canadian Red Cross Society received court approval on 14 September 2000 of its plan to compensate victims of Canada's tainted blood tragedy (and pay other creditors).
To examine the frequency of adverse events related to radiation therapy that lead to financial compensation in a judicial system that is not based on litigation in court but on statutory insurance where proof of medical negligence is not required for obtaining compensation.
In Finland, an injured patient does not sue through the courts, but submits an insurance claim to the Patient Insurance Association. Proof of medical negligence is not required for obtaining compensation. We reviewed all filed claims associated with radiotherapy presented to the Patient Insurance Association from May 1987 to January 1999. During this time period, 1,732,000 patient visits to radiation therapy units were made, and the estimated number of radiotherapy treatments was 86,600. The data collected included descriptions of the adverse events, examination of the radiation therapy procedures followed, assessment of the causal relation of the event to radiotherapy by the therapists involved and by independent reviewers, and the sums used for compensation.
Only 102 patients (about 0.1%) had filed a claim for financial compensation, and in 18 (0.02%) cases the claim led to compensation. The mean national annual expenditure used for compensation was $35,200, and the sums paid in single cases ranged from $310 to $287,430 (median, $1,970). The expenditure used for compensating adverse radiation events was about $4 per treated patient, which is about 0.3% of all radiation therapy costs.
The frequency of radiation therapy injuries that are financially compensated can remain low in an insurance-based judicial system where no litigation or attorneys are involved.