Mendelson Danuta, Keane Michael, Bagaric Mirko, Graydon Cameron
Professor Emeritus, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Adjunct Associate Professor, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Law Med. 2020 Aug;27(4):856-864.
Front-line health care personnel, including anaesthetists, otolaryngologists, and other health professionals dealing with acute cases of coronavirus, face a high risk of infection and thus mortality. The scientific evidence establishes that to protect them, hospital protocols should require that wearing of the highest levels of personal protective equipment (PPE) be available for doctors and nurses performing aerosol-generating procedures, such as intubation, sputum induction, open suctioning of airways, bronchoscopy, etc. of COVID-19 patients. Although several international bodies have issued recommendations for a very high-level PPE to be used when these procedures are undertaken, the current PPE guidelines in Australia have tended to be more relaxed, and hospital authorities relying on them might not comply with legal obligations to their employee health care workers. Failure to provide high-level PPE in many hospitals is of concern for a large number of health care workers; this article examines the scientific literature on the topic and provides a legal perspective on hospital authorities' possible liability in negligence.
一线医护人员，包括麻醉师、耳鼻喉科医生以及其他处理冠状病毒急性病例的医疗专业人员，面临着很高的感染风险，进而有死亡风险。科学证据表明，为保护他们，医院规程应要求为进行诸如对新冠肺炎患者进行插管、诱导痰液、气道开放吸引、支气管镜检查等产生气溶胶操作的医生和护士提供最高级别的个人防护装备（PPE）。尽管几个国际机构已发布建议，在进行这些操作时应使用非常高级别的个人防护装备，但澳大利亚目前的个人防护装备指南往往较为宽松，依赖这些指南的医院当局可能未履行对其医护人员雇员的法定义务。许多医院未能提供高级别的个人防护装备，这引起了大量医护人员的关注；本文审视了关于该主题的科学文献，并从法律角度探讨了医院当局在过失方面可能承担的责任。
