ABSTRACT
Background. Until 2004, requests for clinical documentation proceeding from the Judicial Administration on Specialist Care of Pamplona were received in six different centres and were processed independently, with different procedures, and documents were even sent in duplicate, with the resulting work load. This article describes the procedure for processing requests for documentation proceeding from the Law Courts and analyses the requests received. Methods. A circuit was set up to channel the judicial requests that arrived at the Specialist Health Care Centres of Pamplona and at the Juridical Regime Service of the Health System of Navarra-Osasunbidea, and a Higher Technician in Health Documentation was contracted to centralise these requests. A proceedings protocol was established to unify criteria and speed up the process, and a database was designed to register the proceedings. Results. In the course of 2004, 210 requests for documentation by legal requirement were received. Of these, 24 were claims of patrimonial responsibility and 13 were requested by lawyers with the patient's authorisation. The most frequent jurisdictional order was penal (43.33%). Ninety-three point one five percent (93.15%) of the requests proceeded from law courts in the autonomous community of Navarra. The centre that received the greatest number of requests was the "Príncipe de Viana" Consultation Centre (33.73%).The most frequently requested documentation was a copy of reports (109) and a copy of the complete clinical record (39). On two occasions the original clinical record was required. The average time of response was 6.6 days. Conclusions. The centralisation of administration has brought greater agility to the process and homogeneity in the criteria of processing. Less time is involved in preparing and dispatching the documentation, the dispatch of duplicate documents is avoided, the work load has been reduced and the dispersal of documentation is avoided, a situation that guarantees greater privacy for the patient.
Subject(s)
Documentation , Jurisprudence , SpainABSTRACT
Fundamento. Hasta el año 2004 las solicitudes de documentaciónclínica por parte de la Administración de Justiciasobre Asistencia Especializada de Pamplona se recibían en seiscentros distintos, siendo tramitadas de manera independiente,con maneras de proceder diferentes e incluso con envío dedocumentación duplicada, con la consiguiente carga de trabajo.En el presente trabajo se describe el procedimiento para latramitación de solicitudes de documentación remitidas desdelos juzgados y analizar las solicitudes recibidas.Material y métodos. Se estableció un circuito para canalizarlas solicitudes judiciales que llegaban a los centros de AsistenciaEspecializada de Pamplona y al Servicio de Régimen Jurídicodel Servicio Navarro de Salud-Osasunbidea y se contratóun Técnico Superior en Documentación Sanitaria que las centralizara.Se elaboró un protocolo de actuación para unificar criteriosy agilizar el proceso, y se diseñó una base de datos pararegistrar las actuaciones.Resultados. Durante el año 2004 se recibieron 210 solicitudesde documentación por exigencia legal. De éstas, 24 fueronpor reclamaciones de responsabilidad patrimonial y 13 fueronsolicitadas por abogados con autorización del paciente. Elorden jurisdiccional más frecuente fue el penal (43,33%). El93,15% de las solicitudes provenían de juzgados de la propiacomunidad. El centro que mayor número de solicitudes recibiófue el Centro de Consultas Príncipe de Viana (33,73%). Ladocumentación solicitada más frecuente fue la copia de informes(109) y la copia de historia completa (39). En dos ocasionesse requirió historia original. El tiempo medio de respuesta fue de6,6 días.Conclusiones. La centralización de la gestión ha aportadomayor agilidad al proceso y homogeneidad en los criterios deactuación. Conlleva menos tiempo en la preparación y envío dela documentación, evita el envío de documentación duplicada,disminuye la carga de trabajo y evita la dispersión de la documentación,situación que garantiza una mayor intimidad para elpaciente
Background. Until 2004, requests for clinical documentation proceeding from the Judicial Administration on Specialist Care of Pamplona were received in six different centres and were processed independently, with different procedures, and documents were even sent in duplicate, with the resulting work load. This article describes the procedure for processing requests for documentation proceeding from the Law Courts and analyses the requests received. Methods. A circuit was set up to channel the judicial requests that arrived at the Specialist Health Care Centres of Pamplona and at the Juridical Regime Service of the Health System of Navarra-Osasunbidea, and a Higher Technician in Health Documentation was contracted to centralise these requests. A proceedings protocol was established to unify criteria and speed up the process, and a database was designed to register the proceedings. Results. In the course of 2004, 210 requests for documentation by legal requirement were received. Of these, 24 were claims of patrimonial responsibility and 13 were requested by lawyers with the patients authorisation. The most frequent jurisdictional order was penal (43.33%). Ninety-three point one five percent (93.15%) of the requests proceeded from law courts in the autonomous community of Navarra. The centre that received the greatest number of requests was the Príncipe de Viana Consultation Centre (33.73%).The most frequently requested documentation was a copy of reports (109) and a copy of the complete clinical record (39). On two occasions the original clinical record was required. The average time of response was 6.6 days. Conclusions. The centralisation of administration has brought greater agility to the process and homogeneity in the criteria of processing. Less time is involved in preparing and dispatching the documentation, the dispatch of duplicate documents is avoided, the work load has been reduced and the dispersal of documentation is avoided, a situation that guarantees greater privacy for the patient
