论文部分内容阅读
这是一条上海很轰动的社会新闻:一位居民,为儿子穿上一件新买来的棉袄,被隐藏在棉袄中的一枚缝纫针刺入儿子的心脏,幸而抢救及时,才救回了一条小生命。这条新闻,实际上是从那个“针眼”引起的,如果后来那位大夫不是发现了那个针眼,就想不到异物进入体质;如果不是从小孩的身上取出了钢针,就想不到事态如此严重,也就不会引起报纸接二连三的报道。这个小小的针眼,却引来了大大的问题。问题之一,是为什么先后两位大夫,诊断结果,完全不同。一个说“没有问题”,一个却发现了问题,结果呢,如果按照“没有问题”的判断,吃几颗“先锋霉素”,那可能肇出一场人命官司。为什么先前的大夫看不出这个毛病,是设备不够吗?是技术不够吗?还是涉及到大夫的职业道德问题?
This is a very sensational social news in Shanghai: A resident, put on a new jacket bought for his son, a sewing needle hidden in a jacket quilted into the son’s heart, but fortunately rescued in time, it was rescued A small life. This news is actually caused by that “pinhole”. If the doctor did not find the pinhole then he could not think of the foreign body entering the body. If the needle was not taken out of the child’s body, it would have been impossible to think of such a serious situation. It will not cause the newspaper one after another coverage. This little pinhole, has caused a big problem. One of the problems is why two successive doctors have completely different diagnostic results. One said “no problem”, one actually found the problem. As a result, if you follow the “no problem” judgment and eat a few cephalosporins, it may open a life-threatening case. Why do not the previous doctor can not see this problem, the equipment is not enough? Technology is not enough? Is it related to the doctor’s professional ethics?