《中国康复理论与实践》

《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2019, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (9): 1060-1065.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.09.013

• 标准与规范 • 上一篇    下一篇

我国伤残评定技术标准的现状及其与国外标准的比较

王旭1,2,3,4, 陈军3, 靳康佳1,2,3   

  1. 1.中国政法大学证据科学教育部重点实验室，北京市 100088
    2.中国政法大学司法文明协同创新中心，北京市 100088
    3.中国政法大学法庭科学标准研究中心，北京市 100088
    4.上海市现场物证重点实验室，上海市 200083
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-29 修回日期:2019-08-22 出版日期:2019-09-25 发布日期:2019-09-25
  • 通讯作者: 王旭，E-mail: wangxu0409@126.com E-mail:wangxu0409@126.com
  • 作者简介:王旭(1968-)，女，汉族，辽宁兴城市人，硕士，教授、主任法医师，主要研究方向：司法鉴定学，法医临床学。
  • 基金资助:
    1.教育部人文社会科学规划项目(No. 18YJA820018; No. 10YJA820105)；2.上海市现场物证重点实验室开放课题基金;3.证据科学教育部重点实验室(中国政法大学)开放基金资助课题(No. 2018KFKT07)；

Development of Standards of Disability in China and Comparison with Foreign Countries

WANG Xu1,2,3,4, CHEN Jun3, JIN Kang-jia1,2,3   

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Evidence Science, Ministry of Education, Beijing 100088, China
    2.Collaborative Innovation Center of Judicial Civilizatio, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100088, China
    3. Forensic Science Standards Research Center, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100088, China
    4.Shanghai Key Laboratory of Scene Evidence, Shanghai 200083, China
  • Received:2019-04-29 Revised:2019-08-22 Published:2019-09-25 Online:2019-09-25
  • Contact: WANG Xu, E-mail: wangxu0409@126.com E-mail:wangxu0409@126.com
  • Supported by:
    Supported by Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Fund (No. 18YJA820018; No. 10YJA820105) and Shanghai Key Laboratory of on-set Material Evidence Open Researches Fund and Key Laboratory of Evidence Science (China University of Political Science and Law, Ministry of Education) Opening Project (No. 2018KFKT07)

PDF (PC)

摘要： 目的 探讨我国人身损害赔偿中的伤残评定技术标准问题，并提出改进建议。 方法 系统分析我国伤残评定技术标准的现状及问题，并与美国《永久性残损评定指南》(GEPI)、英国《人身伤害案件一般性赔偿金评估指南》(GAGD)比较。 结果 我国现阶段共有伤残评定标准6个，常用的3个，分属不同部门，存在重复制定，内容交叉、相互矛盾的情况。伤残等级采用十级分法，每个等级伤残率相差10%；伤残等级的确定为专家公议的结果，科学性略差。GEPI依据世界卫生组织制定的ICF标准研制，科学性强；无伤残等级概念，伤残值连续；各器官有不同权重，可综合计算；强调客观指征。GAGD直接给出伤残赔偿金额。 结论 我国伤残评定技术标准的建设须统一标准的管理部门，做好标准间的衔接；加强宏观设计，尽早确立标准体系表；推行技术标准的国际交流，修订标准时参考国外的理念与数据。

关键词: 鉴定标准, 法医临床, 永久性残损评定指南, 国际功能、残疾和健康分类

Abstract: Objective To discuss the technical standards of disability assessment in personal injury compensation in China, and to put forward the conception of standard construction. Methods The disability assessment technical standards in China were systematically reviewed, as well as the contents of the United States Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (GEPI) and the United Kingdom Guidelines for the Assessment of General Compensation in Personal Injury Cases (GAGD). Results There were six standards for disability assessment and three of them were commonly used in China at present, coming from different departments. There were some repeated, intertwined, contradictory contents. The disabilities were graded in ten grades, and the disability rate was difference of 10% between two successive grades. The determination of disability grades came from the consensus of specialists, and was little scientific. In comparison, GEPI was developed according to the ICF standards formulated by the World Health Organization, which contained continuous disability value instead of disability grade, along with the weight of organs to calculate synthetically. GEPI emphasizes Objective indicators. GAGD directly gave the financial amount of disability compensation. Conclusion It is needed to integrate the standard management departments of technical standards for disability assessment in China to link standards up; strengthen macro plan and establish the system table of forensic disability assessment standards; carry out international exchanges of technical standards and refer to the concept and data of foreign standards when revising standards.

Key words: technical standards, forensic clinical medicine, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

中图分类号: