[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the liability for compensation is typically borne by the medical institutions that provide clinical services, rather than by individual attending physicians or platforms that merely provide technical services. Article 121-8 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) stipulates that if a patient suffers harm during the clinical treatment process and the medical institution or its medical staff are at fault, the medical institution shall bear the liability for compensation; if a physician conducts online clinical treatment within the scope of practice of the medical institution and causes harm by prescribing the wrong medication due to negligence, the medical institution shall bear the liability for compensation, and the physician himself/herself may bear internal management responsibilities and administrative responsibilities separately. Online clinical treatment must also comply with the "Measures for the Administration of Online Clinical Treatment (Trial Implementation)" (issued and implemented in 2018) and the "Regulations for the Supervision of Online Clinical Treatment (Trial Implementation)" (issued and implemented in 2022). Online clinical treatment is limited to follow-up patients with certain common diseases and chronic diseases, and prescriptions cannot be issued directly for first-visit patients. If third-party platforms fail to fulfill their obligations of qualification review and process management, they shall bear corresponding responsibilities.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

Online medical consultations have become a common way for people to seek medical treatment, but disputes have also emerged in this process. Patients consult their conditions through the hospital's official mini program, third-party health platforms, or consultants in live-stream rooms. However, the consultants often prescribe medication or recommend drugs based solely on a few descriptions and photos, which may lead to allergic reactions, liver function damage, or worsening of the patient's condition after taking the medication. At this point, patients face a series of entities: the platform operator, the internet hospitals that have joined the platform, the actual attending physicians, and the drug sellers and distributors. Patients often don't know who to claim their rights from or where the prescriptions and consultation records are stored.

II. Key points of contention

First, the determination of the responsible party. Independent internet hospitals are responsible for their own actions; physical hospitals are responsible for online medical services they establish themselves; third-party platforms that merely provide technical services and have fulfilled their review obligations generally do not bear direct responsibility for medical treatment harm, but may be held liable if they fail to perform their obligations in qualification review, personnel management, and prescription and medication management. Second, whether the treatment complies with regulatory requirements. It is a basic principle that internet medical services cannot be provided for first-time patients. For those who exceed this scope and directly prescribe medication, their fault can be relatively clearly identified. Third, the proof of fault and causality. Key factors in determining fault include whether the doctor inquired about the patient's allergy and past medical history, whether they checked for medication contraindications and concomitant drug use, and whether the dosage exceeded normal standards. Determining the causality between the harm and the medication often requires a medical malpractice appraisal. Fourth, distinguishing between drug defects and medication errors. If the drug itself has quality defects, the responsible party is the drug marketing authorization holder or manufacturer; if there are errors in the prescription process, the responsibility lies with the medical institution. These two types of liability cannot be conflated. Fifth, evidence from medical records and prescriptions. Electronic consultation records, prescriptions, and medication purchase records are typically held by institutions and platforms, making it difficult for patients to obtain such evidence.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Based on Henglue's practical experience in handling medical malpractice disputes, online consultation cases and offline medical treatment cases follow the same liability logic. The difficulties lie in two aspects: first, identifying the appropriate defendant; second, turning the electronic medical treatment process into usable evidence. We usually advise patients to proceed from three levels: first, confirm the actual name of the medical institution and the attending physician through the platform and order information; then request to copy and seal the electronic medical records, consultation records, and prescriptions; finally, verify whether the institution and the physician have the qualifications to provide online medical services, and whether the consultation falls within the scope of diseases allowed for follow-up consultations. In practice, patients who sue solely with mobile phone screenshots are often dismissed due to their inability to prove the attending subject and the specific medical treatment actions; once they obtain complete consultation records and prescriptions, the determination of fault will be much smoother. It should also be noted that if a medical institution violates laws, administrative regulations, rules, or medical treatment norms, or conceals, refuses to provide, loses, forges, or alters medical record information, the law directly presumes its fault, which is particularly important in online disputes. Such cases are usually related to the following aspects:\nDisputes over liability for medical damagesThe knowledge system is consistent, which includes disputes over platform agreements and user terms, and can also be combined with other aspects.Specialised legal servicesCoordinate and handle it comprehensively.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Article 121 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) regarding the liability for medical negligence of medical institutions, Article 122 regarding the presumption of fault for violating medical treatment norms and medical record management, as well as the provisions on the scope of medical treatment, prescription management, and platform responsibilities in the "Internet Medical Treatment Management Measures (Trial)" (issued and implemented in 2018) and the "Internet Medical Treatment Supervision Rules (Trial)" (issued in 2022), it is recommended that: First, immediately save the consultation page, order and payment records, prescription screenshots, drug packaging, and delivery documents, and do not clear mobile chat records. Second, request the platform and medical institutions to provide information on the attending physicians and complete electronic medical records and prescriptions, and keep written evidence if they refuse to provide them. Third, seek medical treatment promptly after suffering harm and truthfully report the medication situation, and apply for a medical injury appraisal if necessary. Fourth, list the medical institution that provided the medical treatment as a defendant in the lawsuit, decide whether to jointly claim platform liability as appropriate, and pay attention to the three-year statute of limitations. Fifth, if the case involves drug quality issues, claim against the drug marketing authorization holder or manufacturer separately to form a complete liability chain. Disputes within the scope of platform compliance can also be referred to the relevant provisions.Contracts and commercial disputesThe approach is to handle it in parallel and prepare the evidence related to the user agreement simultaneously.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

There are three points worth noting: Firstly, the "health consultants" and "physician assistants" in live streaming, short videos, or social media platforms are not legitimate medical practitioners. If the other party has never clearly stated their practice institution or scope of practice, the responsibility determination will be even more complex, and when seeking justice, it is important to clarify their underlying affiliation. Secondly, electronic medical records and prescriptions are crucial evidence in such cases. Many platforms regularly delete data after a certain period of time, making it increasingly difficult to collect evidence as time passes. Therefore, it is necessary to apply for data preservation or copying as soon as possible. Thirdly, don't overlook administrative complaints and regulatory channels. Reporting unlawful first-time consultations and unqualified prescription issuance to the competent health departments can often prompt institutions to resolve the issue through voluntary negotiation.Personal injury and medical disputesThe appraisal period of the case is relatively long. Whether to initiate the appraisal and when to initiate it should be judged carefully based on the extent of the damage and the status of the evidence, so as to avoid both incurring appraisal costs and failing to prove the causality.Corporate Law and ComplianceFrom this perspective, the platform and medical institutions should also establish a mechanism for preserving and reviewing prescriptions, so as to reduce the risk of disputes at the source.Beijing Henglu Law FirmTip: First, identify who is responsible for the medical treatment, then discuss compensation. Listing the correct parties involved is the first step to winning the case.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If a doctor prescribes the wrong medication during an online consultation, is there a high chance of winning a compensation claim?

The key lies in whether it is possible to prove the existence of a causal relationship between the medical treatment error and the outcome. If complete consultation records and prescriptions can be obtained, and they show that the patient's allergy history was not inquired about, medication contraindications were violated, or the dosage exceeded the normal range, the likelihood of a successful claim is higher. However, if there are only screenshots and it is impossible to identify the attending physician and the specific medical treatment actions, the difficulty will obviously increase.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare?

The consultation page, order payment records, screenshots of prescriptions and medication recommendations, electronic medical records, drug packaging and delivery certificates, medical records and examination reports, diagnosis certificates of damage consequences, and communication records with the platform and doctors; for those applying for medical damage appraisal, they also need to provide complete appraisal materials.

Q3: Approximately how much does it cost to protect one's rights?

The cost of medical damage appraisal usually ranges from several thousand yuan to tens of thousands of yuan, and is charged according to the items of appraisal; the litigation fees are calculated in stages according to the amount of the claim; and the attorney's fees are subject to the provisions of the entrustment contract. If the damage is minor and the cost of appraisal is obviously higher than the expected compensation, it is recommended to first consider negotiating with the institution or resolving the issue through administrative complaint channels.

Q4: How long does it take from the occurrence of a dispute to the resolution of the case?

Generally, administrative complaints will receive feedback within dozens of days; in litigation, medical damage appraisals often take several months, and the first-instance trial typically lasts about a year. Cases involving appeals or re-appraisals may take even longer. It is recommended to secure evidence as soon as possible after the damage occurs to avoid difficulties in providing evidence due to the loss of medical records.

Q5: What should I do first?

First, confirm the actual medical institutions and attending physicians, then request in writing to copy or seal the electronic medical records, consultation records, and prescriptions; at the same time, save all page screenshots and payment receipts, promptly seek medical treatment at regular medical institutions and record the medication situation, and then consult a professional lawyer to evaluate the claim path.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The adjudication guidelines in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Personal injury legal services·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.