《中国康复理论与实践》

《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2019, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (2): 239-243.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.02.021

• 标准与规范 • 上一篇    下一篇

《人体损伤致残程度分级》与《永久残损评定指南》的比较研究

周晶, 王旭   

  1. 1. 中国政法大学，a. 证据科学教育部重点实验室；b. 司法文明协同创新中心；c. 法庭科学标准研究中心，北京市100088；
    2. 上海市现场物证重点实验室，上海市200083
  • 收稿日期:2018-06-19 修回日期:2018-10-17 出版日期:2019-02-25 发布日期:2019-04-01
  • 通讯作者: 王旭。E-mail: wangxu0409@126.com
  • 作者简介:周晶(1992-)，女，汉族，广东深圳市人，硕士研究生，主要研究方向：法医临床。
  • 基金资助:
    1.教育部人文社会科学规划项目(No. 18YJA820018; No. 10YJA820105)

Comparison of Classification of the Impairment Related to Injury and Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment

ZHOU Jing, WANG Xu   

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Evidence Science, Ministry of Education， China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100088, China
    2. Collaborative Innovation Center of Judicial Civilization， 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:2018-06-19 Revised:2018-10-17 Published:2019-02-25 Online:2019-04-01
  • Contact: WANG Xu. E-mail: wangxu0409@126.com
  • Supported by:
    Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Fund (No. 18YJA820018 and No. 10YJA820105)

PDF (PC)

摘要： 目的 完善我国伤残评定制度。方法 对国内外伤残赔偿的性质及方式、国际上伤残评定标准颁布情况进行梳理与比较；以美国医学会《永久性残损评定指南》(GEPI)为参照，对《人体损伤致残程度分级》(《致残分级》)进行分析与评价。结果 《致残分级》总体上与GEPI存在相关性，但存在遗漏部分伤残评定条款、缺乏多发性损伤的晋级原则等问题。结论 《致残分级》具有普适性，但需要借鉴GEPI残损区域分值，细化等级划分，补充晋级原则，以满足我国现阶段伤残评定的需要。

关键词: 伤残评定, 人体损伤致残程度分级, 永久性残损评定指南

Abstract: Objective To perfect disability assessment in China. Methods The nature and method of disability compensation inside and outside China were reviewed, as well as the promulgation of disability assessment outside the region. The Classification of the Impairment Related to Injury was analyzed based on the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (GEPI). Results The Classification of the Impairment Related to Injury was consistent with GEPI in general, but there also were some problems, such as the omission of clauses, and lacking the promoted principle of multiple injury. Conclusion The Classification of the Impairment Related to Injury is universal. But it needs to take quantification of impairment of GEPI as reference, and refine the principle and supplement of the promoted principle, to meet the practical needs of disability assessment in China.

Key words: disability assessment, Classification of the Impairment Related to Injury, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment

中图分类号: