Primary headaches can be considered simultaneously as symptom and disease itself, while secondary headaches are expressions of a pathological process that can be systemic or locoregional. Because of its subjective features, headache is often difficult to assess and quantify by severity, frequency and invalidity rate, and for these reasons it has often been implicated in legal controversies. Headache has seldom been considered in the criminal law, except when it represents a typical symptom of a disease whose existence can be objectively assessed (i. e. raised intracranial pressure). Therefore, in civil legislation it is not yet coded to start claiming for invalidity compensation. In particular, one of the most debated medical-legal questions is represented by headaches occurring after head injury. Headache is often the principal symptom at the beginning of several toxic chronic syndromes, with many implications, especially in working claims, and, more recently, it may be referred to as one of the most frequent symptoms by victims of mobbing (i. e. psychological harassment in the workplace). The National Institute for Industrial Accident Insurance (INAIL) scales (instituted by the law 38/2000) mention the “Subjective cranial trauma syndrome” and give an invalidity rate evaluation. With reference to other headache forms, no legislation really exists at the present time, and headache is only considered as a symptom of a certain coded disease. Requests for invalidity social pension and the question of off-label prescriptions (drug prescription for a disease, without formal indication for it) are other controversial matters.
Medical-legal issues in headache: penal and civil Italian legislation, working claims, social security, off-label prescription.
VARETTO, Lorenzo
2006-01-01
Abstract
Primary headaches can be considered simultaneously as symptom and disease itself, while secondary headaches are expressions of a pathological process that can be systemic or locoregional. Because of its subjective features, headache is often difficult to assess and quantify by severity, frequency and invalidity rate, and for these reasons it has often been implicated in legal controversies. Headache has seldom been considered in the criminal law, except when it represents a typical symptom of a disease whose existence can be objectively assessed (i. e. raised intracranial pressure). Therefore, in civil legislation it is not yet coded to start claiming for invalidity compensation. In particular, one of the most debated medical-legal questions is represented by headaches occurring after head injury. Headache is often the principal symptom at the beginning of several toxic chronic syndromes, with many implications, especially in working claims, and, more recently, it may be referred to as one of the most frequent symptoms by victims of mobbing (i. e. psychological harassment in the workplace). The National Institute for Industrial Accident Insurance (INAIL) scales (instituted by the law 38/2000) mention the “Subjective cranial trauma syndrome” and give an invalidity rate evaluation. With reference to other headache forms, no legislation really exists at the present time, and headache is only considered as a symptom of a certain coded disease. Requests for invalidity social pension and the question of off-label prescriptions (drug prescription for a disease, without formal indication for it) are other controversial matters.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
