Search

We report on a comprehensive 25-year study on criminal medical liability in France, undertaken to establish trends in the number of cases being brought before the criminal courts. We did this by interrogating the database on the Légifrance website using a Boolean equation (' pénal' (criminal) AND ' médecin' (physician) OR ' docteur' (doctor)). In total 539 cases were selected, in which the status of the physician either influenced the punishment imposed, or was a prerequisite for the commission of the offence. The results of the search produced two outcomes: offences and the dates of the most recent criminal judgements (which had been left blank). Further data were also collected: references to court cases, hearing dates, offence dates, procedural time limits, numbers of accused parties, types of punishments and physician characteristics. The number of court hearings increased from the 1980s until the late 1990s. Since then, it has remained stable at around 25 cases per year. Of the defendants appearing before the courts, 39.2% have been found guilty. On average, 10 to 13 physicians every year - that is, one per month - are punished. Those most often punished are obstetrician-gynaecologists (13%), followed by intensive care anaesthetists (11%) and then by general practitioners (6.7%). The offences most frequently occurring are manslaughter (36.5%), illegal profits (12%), unintentional injuries (11.5%) and sexual offences (10.1%). The results are most reassuring in terms of the risks posed by the practice of medicine in France. Such a risk does indeed exist; however, it is at a low level and stable.

Objective: French health authorities put general practitioners at the heart of the colorectal cancer screening. This position raises organisational issues and poses medico-legal problems for the professionals and institutions involved in these campaigns, related to the key concepts of medical decisions and suitability of standards. The objective of our study is to reveal the preferences of general practitioners related to colorectal cancer screening organisation with regard to the medico-legal risk METHODS: A discrete choice questionnaire presenting hypothetical screening scenarios was mailed to 2114 physicians from 20 French different areas. The preferences of 358 general practitioners were analysed using logistic regression models., Results: The factors that have significant impact on the preferences of general practitioners are the capacity of the primary care professional in the procedure, the manner in which pre-screening information is given to patients, the manner in which screening results are given to patients, the number of reminders sent to patients who test positive and who do not undergo a colonoscopy and the remuneration of the attending physician., Conclusions: Our results reveals that current colorectal cancer screening organisation is not adapted to general practitioners preferences. This work offers the public authorities avenues for reflection on possible developments in order to optimize the involvement of general practitioners in the promotion of cancer screening programme., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Breast cancer is a major public health challenge. Organized mammography screening (OS) is considered one way to reduce breast cancer mortality. EU recommendations prone mass deployment of OS, and back in 2004, France introduced a national OS programme for women aged 50-74 years. However, in 2012, participation rate was still just 52.7%, well short of the targeted 70% objective. In an effort to re-address the (in) efficiency of the programme, the French National Cancer Institute has drafted an expert-group review of the ethical issues surrounding breast cancer mammography screening., Discussion: Prompted by emerging debate over the efficiency of the screening scheme and its allied public information provision, we keynote the experts' report based on analysis of epidemiological data and participation rate from the public health authorities. The low coverage of the OS scheme may be partly explained by the fact that a significant number of women undergo mammography outside OS and thus outside OS criteria. These findings call for further thinking on (i) the ethical principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance underpinning this public health initiative, (ii) the reasons behind women's and professionals' behavior, and (iii) the need to analyze how information provision to women and the doctor-patient relationship need to evolve in response to scientific controversy over the risks and benefits of conducting mammographic screening., Summary: This work calls for a reappraisal of the provision of screening programme information. We advocate a move to integrate the points sparking debate over the efficiency of the screening scheme to guarantee full transparency. The perspective is to strengthen the respect for autonomy allowing women to make an informed choice in their decision on whether or not to participate.

Background: Based on international and national recommendations, organized breast cancer screening in France raises questions of medical ethics built around the key concepts of individual autonomy and public health policy. Because of the evolving knowledge, professionals and institutions involved in the program must review the ethical values associated with this medical practice., Methods: The ethical aspects of organized breast cancer screening were studied. In response to newly acquired knowledge highlighted by a review of texts governing this practice in France, proposals for changes resulting from reflections of a working group coordinated by the National Cancer Institute are presented., Results: Ethical issues raised by screening must find expression in the general principles of the program's organization: acceptability of screening, efficiency, adverse effects, equity of access, free care…, but also at different stages of the procedure: information delivery, first and second invitations, refusal of further diagnostic investigation…, Conclusion: A better match between breast cancer screening and recently developed knowledge requires optimal information delivery to women targeted by the program as well as a stronger role for the referring healthcare professional., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The principal aim of our study was to establish concordance between post-mortem CT (PMCT) and forensic standard autopsy (SA) in detecting lesions according to different anatomical regions. A secondary aim was to determine the efficacy of PMCT in showing lethal lesions., Methods: PMCTs were compared with autopsies in 236 cadavers in different contexts of death. PMCT findings were assessed by two independent radiologists., Results: Concordance between PMCT and autopsy was almost perfect in showing skull, basal skull and hyoid bone fractures as well as in detecting facial, vertebral or pelvic fractures. Both examinations were discordant in demonstrating some intracranial injuries, vascular or organ wounds (more findings showed by autopsy), as well in showing free air in anatomical cavities (more findings detected by PMCT). Moreover, PMCT was effective in determining lethal lesions in the context of craniofacial trauma or after a gunshot wound. Concordance between the findings of the two radiologists was almost perfect for each type of lesion., Conclusion: PMCT could be considered as effective as SA in determining the cause of death in certain traumatic events. It was also effective in showing lethal lesions and could be a useful tool in reducing the number of SA., Key Points: • Post-mortem CT is increasingly performed as an alternative/adjunct to formal autopsy. • More modern CT systems provide greater anatomical scope. • PMCT can usually determine the cause of most deaths following trauma. • Prospective studies are still required to establish an algorithm for forensic CT.