[Analysis of final judgements in cases of medical negligence occurred in Ukraine].

OBJECTIVE: Introduction: The peculiarities of the disadvantages of providing medical care in Ukraine are not well-known abroad. The aim: To study the peculiarities of court decisions in cases of unfavorable consequences of medical activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: The article analyzes the official data of the General Prosecutor's Office of Ukraine and the website of court decisions regarding criminal cases against medical practitioners. RESULTS: Review: Approximately 600 cases of alleged medical malpractice cases are registered annually in Ukraine. Only less than one percent of them are brought to the court. The guilt of medical practitioners was proven in majority (80,8%) of court decisions. Acquittals of defendants were pronounced in 5,9% of court verdicts. Obstetrics and gynecology, surgery, internal medicine and anesthesiology are in the top of high-risk medical specialties. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Majority of medical malpractice litigations are sued in Ukraine baselessly. In cases of medical negligence majority of defendants are acquitted as usual.

Is the swiss health care system a model for the United States?

Both supporters and critics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) have argued that it is similar to Switzerland's Federal Law on Health Insurance (LAMal), which currently governs Swiss health care, and have either praised or condemned the ACA on the basis of this alleged similarity. I challenge these observers on the grounds that they overlook critical problems with the Swiss model, such as its inequities in access, and critical differences between it and the ACA, such as the roots in, and continuing commitment to, social insurance of the Swiss model. Indeed, the daunting challenge of attempting to impose the tightly regulated model of operation of the Swiss model on mega-corporations like UnitedHealth, WellPoint, or Aetna is likely to trigger no less ferocious resistance than a fully public, single-payer system would. I also conclude that the ACA might unravel in ways unintended or even opposed by its designers and supporters, as employers, confronted with ever-rising costs, retreat from sponsoring insurance, and workers react in outrage as they confront the unaffordable underinsurance mandated by the ACA. A new political and ideological landscape may then ensue that finally ushers in a truly national health program.

Using third-party financing to help today's patient pay for treatment and care.

Patients walking into your practice today are different than the ones you saw a few years ago. Larger deductibles and out-of-pocket costs may cause many of them to put off recommended treatment. What can you do to ease patients' cost concerns and help them move forward with the care they want and need? Creating a comprehensive financial policy that includes a third-party patient financing program is a good place to start. Here's how to ensure that you select the best program for you.