Principles of social security and health insurance for farmers in Poland and Germany--a comparative assessment.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: As landowners occupied with agricultural production comprise a sizeable part of the populations in mid- and western European countries, it seemed reasonable to assess the organization of health care systems concerning farmers and their families in Poland and Germany. Both countries have similar geographical conditions and rural environments. It so happens that in Poland the principles of the system of agricultural insurance (KRUS) is based on the experiences of Germany and France. STATE OF KNOWLEDGE: Basically, both in Poland and Germany, the agricultural health insurance companies provide the same insurance cover as other health insurance companies. In both countries, under certain conditions, in the case of illness, the insured farmers receive instead of sickness benefit operational assistance and home help. In spite of the similarities that characterize both administrations, many particular differences are to be noted, e.g. the farmers' social insurance in Poland is subject to only one ministry, in contrast to Germany where two ministries are responsible for farmers' social insurance. In Poland, KRUS is a monopolistic organization, whereas in Germany, nine similar independent structures fulfil the task of a health insurance company. Needless to say, many more funds are available for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation in Germany than in Poland, due to obvious differences in the overall national income.

[The anaesthetist's liability and bullfights]. / Responsabilité de l'anesthésiste et corrida.

Whether you are an aficionado or completely uninitiated, everyone has an opinion on bull-fighting. The bull-fighter is in constant risk of injury. A medical team made up of surgeons, anesthetists, emergency physicians and nurses remains present throughout the show. For the anaesthetist and surgeon, a wounded bullfighter is an emergency because the vital and functional prognosis are engaged. The team must act in conformity with normal practice and the Code of Medical Ethics because any lack of coordination between the practitioners is punishable by law in the same way as technical fault. Several specific aspects of this type of medical procedure should be highlighted: firstly, the legal restrictions within the corrida, and secondly, the nature of the medical team, which may be comprised of doctors normally based within a public health institution and others who practice in a private health establishment. The particularity of the situation reveals differences in the system of liability, and civil liability must be distinguished from administrative liability: both of these allow the victim to obtain compensation for harm caused, but the consequences of each are different according to doctor status. The fact that the anaesthetists frequently work on a voluntary and benevolent basis does not exonerate them from liability. Lastly, a question frequently addressed is whether or not the doctor is covered by his professional insurance when he is on ringside duty.

Cuestiones médico-legales de interés para la práctica de la ortodoncia en España / Legal considerations of orthodontic practice in Spain

Este artículo aborda los aspectos médicolegales de mayor interés para la práctica de la ortodoncia en España. Se inicia con una exposición del marco jurídico que regula el ejercicio profesional. Se continúa con una valoración del rango de incertidumbre de los resultados de los tratamientos ortodóncicos para completarlo con una valoración médico-legal y jurídica de la responsabilidad civil del ortodoncista. (AU)

Managed care organization liabilities.

While certain efficiencies and cost savings have been achieved, Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) have risk exposures never before considered. MCOs provide a number of services for their clients. Specifically, they are involved in credentialing, network development, utilization review, and the hiring and firing of physicians and other allied medical professionals subject to rather complex and detailed contractual arrangements. The insurance industry has responded to the increase in claim exposure associated with the aforementioned activities by providing any number of insurance products. Depending on the insurance provider, a number of different coverages are available. The final decision as to which coverage to purchase will be governed by the risks associated with a particular MCO, contractual protections, available cash flow, protections under federal and state laws. The point of this article is to apprise MCOs of the claims now starting to develop against MCOs as well as alternative insurance products that can be purchased in order to protect both the firm's assets as well as those of individual directors and officers.

Provider excess loss insurance: a safety net for risky business.

Capitation agreements are challenging healthcare providers to keep the cost of delivering care at or below their agreed-upon capitated payment. To protect themselves when this cannot be accomplished, providers are purchasing provider excess loss insurance, which reimburses providers if their patient costs exceed a deductible or per-member-per-month dollar threshold. It is important that managers understand differences among the three general types of providers excess loss insurance: per-person, aggregate, and carve-out.