침습적 뇌자극기술과 법적 규제 - 뇌심부자극술(Deep Brain Stimulation)을 중심으로 - Invasive Brain Stimulation and Legal Regulation: with a special focus on Deep Brain Stimulation원문보기
뇌에 전기적·자기적 자극을 가하는 뇌자극기술은 신경학적·정신학적 장애에 대해 다양한 범위에 걸쳐 상당한 치료 가능성을 보여준다. 뇌자극기술은 침습 여부에 따라 침습적 기술과 비침습적 기술로 구분되는데, 뇌심부자극술(이하, DBS)은 대표적인 침습적 뇌자극기술에 속한다. 현재 DBS는 식약처 고시인 "의료기기 품목 및 품목별 등급에 관한 규정"에 따라 4등급 의료기기로 분류되어 몇몇 질환에서 안정된 치료법으로 사용되고 있다. 동시에 날로 그 기술이 발전하여 다양한 방향에서 이용방법이 논의되고 있다. 반면, 이와 관련한 법적 규제에 대한 논의는 상대적으로 적은 편이다. 이러한 배경에서 본 글은 DBS의 기술 및 효과와 안전성을 간략하게 소개한 이후, DBS 이용에서 고려할 수 있는 주요한 법적 쟁점을 이용 목적별로, 즉 치료목적, 임상연구 목적, 표준적 치료법이 아니나 다른 치료법이 없는 경우, 향상 목적으로 구분하여 논의하고, 어떠한 목적의 이용이든 DBS 이용에 따른 법적 책임의 문제에서 새로이 공통적으로 부상하고 있는 쟁점-위험·이익평가, 의사의 설명의무, 환자의 동의능력, 기기의 조정, 보험의 보장-을 소개하고 논의한다.
뇌에 전기적·자기적 자극을 가하는 뇌자극기술은 신경학적·정신학적 장애에 대해 다양한 범위에 걸쳐 상당한 치료 가능성을 보여준다. 뇌자극기술은 침습 여부에 따라 침습적 기술과 비침습적 기술로 구분되는데, 뇌심부자극술(이하, DBS)은 대표적인 침습적 뇌자극기술에 속한다. 현재 DBS는 식약처 고시인 "의료기기 품목 및 품목별 등급에 관한 규정"에 따라 4등급 의료기기로 분류되어 몇몇 질환에서 안정된 치료법으로 사용되고 있다. 동시에 날로 그 기술이 발전하여 다양한 방향에서 이용방법이 논의되고 있다. 반면, 이와 관련한 법적 규제에 대한 논의는 상대적으로 적은 편이다. 이러한 배경에서 본 글은 DBS의 기술 및 효과와 안전성을 간략하게 소개한 이후, DBS 이용에서 고려할 수 있는 주요한 법적 쟁점을 이용 목적별로, 즉 치료목적, 임상연구 목적, 표준적 치료법이 아니나 다른 치료법이 없는 경우, 향상 목적으로 구분하여 논의하고, 어떠한 목적의 이용이든 DBS 이용에 따른 법적 책임의 문제에서 새로이 공통적으로 부상하고 있는 쟁점-위험·이익평가, 의사의 설명의무, 환자의 동의능력, 기기의 조정, 보험의 보장-을 소개하고 논의한다.
Brain stimulation technology that administers electrical and magnetic stimulation to a brain has shown a significant level of possibility for treating a wide range of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Depending on its nature, the technology is defined either as invasive or non-invasive...
Brain stimulation technology that administers electrical and magnetic stimulation to a brain has shown a significant level of possibility for treating a wide range of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Depending on its nature, the technology is defined either as invasive or non-invasive, and deep brain stimulation (DBS) is one of the most well-known invasive brain stimulation technologies. Currently categorized as grade 4 medical device in accordance with Guideline On Medical Devices And Their Grades, a Notification of Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), the DBS has been used as a stable treatment for several diseases. At the same time, the DBS technology has recently achieved substantial advancement, encouraging active discussions for its use from various perspectives. On the contrary, debates over legal regulation related to the use of DBS has relatively been smaller in numbers. In this context, this article aims to 1) introduce the DBS technology and its safety in setting out the tone; 2) touch upon major legal issues that would potentially rise from its use for four different purposes of treatment, clinical study, areas of non-standard treatment where no other methods are available, and enhancement; and finally 3) highlight disputes concerning common emerging issues observed in the aforementioned four purposes from the viewpoint of legal responsibility and liability of using the DBS, which are benefit-risk assessment, physicians' duty of information, patients' capacity to consent, control for device, and insurance coverage.
Brain stimulation technology that administers electrical and magnetic stimulation to a brain has shown a significant level of possibility for treating a wide range of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Depending on its nature, the technology is defined either as invasive or non-invasive, and deep brain stimulation (DBS) is one of the most well-known invasive brain stimulation technologies. Currently categorized as grade 4 medical device in accordance with Guideline On Medical Devices And Their Grades, a Notification of Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), the DBS has been used as a stable treatment for several diseases. At the same time, the DBS technology has recently achieved substantial advancement, encouraging active discussions for its use from various perspectives. On the contrary, debates over legal regulation related to the use of DBS has relatively been smaller in numbers. In this context, this article aims to 1) introduce the DBS technology and its safety in setting out the tone; 2) touch upon major legal issues that would potentially rise from its use for four different purposes of treatment, clinical study, areas of non-standard treatment where no other methods are available, and enhancement; and finally 3) highlight disputes concerning common emerging issues observed in the aforementioned four purposes from the viewpoint of legal responsibility and liability of using the DBS, which are benefit-risk assessment, physicians' duty of information, patients' capacity to consent, control for device, and insurance coverage.
Anderson, Leigh et al., FDA Regulation of Neurological and Pyhsical Medicine Devices: Access to Safe and Effective Neurotechnologies for All Americans, Neuron 92, 2016.
Desmoulin-Canselier, Sonia, Ethical and Legal Issues in Deep Brain Stimulation: An Overview, in: D'Aloia, Antonio/Errigo, Maria Chiara (eds.), Neuroscience and Law, Springer, 2020.
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Tiefe Hirnstimulation. Stand der Wissenschaft und Perspektiven, 2015.
Lee, Darrin J.et al., Current and future directions of deep brain stimulation for neurological and psychiatric disorders, J Neurosurg 131, 2019.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain, 2013.
Prutting, Jens, Rechtliche Aspekte der Tiefen Hirnstimulation, Springer, 2014.
Schmitz-Luhn, Bjorn/Katzenmeier, Christian/Woopen, Christiane, Law and ethics of deep brain stimulation, International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 35, 2012.
Schneider, Lena, Neue Behandlungsmethoden im Arzthaftungsrecht, Springer, 2010.
Zarzycki, Marcin Zygmunt/Domitrz, Izabela, Stimulation-induced side effects after deep brain stimualtion - a systematic review, Acta Neuropsychiatrica 32, 2019.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.