Medical Liability and Nosocomial Infections: Commentary on Judgment No. 369/2006 of the Court of Appeal of Milan
The judgment No. 369 of February 10, 2006, of the Court of Appeal of Milan offers an important reflection on medical liability and the causal link between professional conduct and the harm suffered by patients. In this case, the Court confirmed the liability of the Fondazione Centro S.R. del M.T. for the death of a patient, emphasizing the need for an adequate assessment of clinical conditions and the importance of a personalized therapeutic pathway.
The Case and the First Instance Judgment
The case in question concerned the death of Mr. R. XXX, which occurred due to post-operative complications following a neurosurgical intervention. The Court of Milan had initially established the liability of the Foundation, condemning it to compensate for damages. This decision was based on a technical consultancy that highlighted negligence in the pre-operative preparation and post-operative management of the patient.
- Negligence of healthcare professionals in the pre-operative assessment.
- Prolonged hospital stay without necessity.
- Inappropriate administration of corticosteroids during hospitalization.
The Causal Link and Medical Liability
Liability must be related to the concept of medical treatment that must adhere to correct criteria of medical indication.
The Court had to examine whether there was a causal link between the omissions of the healthcare professionals and the patient's death. It was emphasized that hospitalization and therapeutic decisions are an integral part of the concept of medical treatment, as established by Articles 32 and 13 of the Italian Constitution. The Court acknowledged that, in the absence of an adequate clinical framework and personalized treatment, the patient had been exposed to excessive risks, rendering the conduct of the healthcare professionals negligent.
Conclusions
The judgment of the Court of Appeal of Milan highlights the importance of a personalized approach in patient care and offers insights on medical liability. The decisions of healthcare personnel must always be motivated by adequate clinical evaluations, avoiding exposing patients to unnecessary risks. This case represents an important precedent for future legal disputes in the healthcare sector.
