title: Surgical patents and patients--the ethical dilemmas.
abstract: It is obvious that every inventor should be rewarded for the intellectual effort, and at the same time be encouraged to successively improve his or her discovery and to work on subsequent innovations. Patents also ensure that patent owners are officially protected against intellectual piracy, but protection of intellectual property may be difficult to accomplish. Nevertheless, it all comes down to this basic question: Does a contradiction exist between medical ethics and the "Medical and Surgical Procedure Patents" system? It may well turn out that medical-procedure patents can have a negative influence on the standard of medical care. Medical-method patents may also interfere with the physician-patient relationship. At present, physicians do not question the usefulness of patent protection for medicines, biotechnology, equipment and devices, but they strongly oppose it for surgical procedures.
authors.affiliation: Department of General, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Warsaw Medical University, Poland. ttol@amwaw.edu.pl
authors.forename: Tadeusz
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Tołłoczko
mesh_terms: D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006801:Humans; D010330:Patents as Topic / Q000941:ethics*; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D011044:Poland; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D013514:Surgical Procedures, Operative / Q000941:ethics* / Q000379:methods
references.citation: Ann Surg. 1999 Feb;229(2):187-96
references.pmid: 10024099
references.citation: Arch Ophthalmol. 1999 Jun;117(6):824-6
references.pmid: 10369598
references.citation: Lancet. 1995 Apr 1;345(8953):847
references.pmid: 7898235
references.citation: BMJ. 2000 Jan 29;320(7230):270
references.pmid: 10650016
references.citation: JAMA. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1224-8
references.pmid: 9103347
references.citation: Lancet. 1998 Feb 14;351(9101):518-9
references.pmid: 9482467
references.citation: Soc Philos Policy. 1996 Summer;13(2):113-44
references.pmid: 11653296
references.citation: J Vasc Surg. 2003 Jan;37(1):235-6
references.pmid: 12514611