[Apropos of jurisprudential decisions concerning nosocomial infections].
Nosocomial infection is as old as cares given to patients. Doctors and hospitals are both committees. Since Cohen ruling on December 9, 1988, the "Conseil d'Etat" bases the responsibility for the public hospitals on the concept of uncompromising presumption of fault. Since Bonnici ruling on May 21, 1996 and especially since decisions known as "of staphylococcus aureus" on June 29, 1999, the "Cour de cassation" bases the civil liability for doctors and private hospitals on the principle of obligation of security of result. Such a rigor of the two high jurisdictions leads to a quasi automatic repair of any prejudice recognized as related to a nosocomial infection. The epidemiology of nosocomial infections makes it possible to assess the extent of risks at stake. This is a considerable potential contentious in process of explosion, the cost of which cannot be supported by health economy in its current state. That just shows you the extent of medical, juridical, public health, economical, social and political interests linked to nosocomial infections. It seems urgent to consider definitions that were given to this concept, and within them it will be necessary to individualize what is nosocomial infection entitled to compensation. In this matter medical opinion must prevail over law to better serve it.
Hureau
J
J
jhureau@club-internet.fr
D003428:Cross Infection / Q000191:economics / Q000453:epidemiology*; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006761:Hospitals; D006801:Humans; D007603:Jurisprudence; D016365:Liability, Legal; D010820:Physicians; D012307:Risk Factors