Clostridium Difficile – The New MRSA?

Hospital acquired infections remain in the news. Foot Anstey act for a number of claimants pursuing claims in respect of MRSA infection. Arguments continue to rage as to whether patients suffering the effects of the “hospital superbug” are entitled to be compensated for their loss.

Recent press reports have focused on the possibility of bringing claims under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002, avoiding some of the evidential difficulties faced in tort claims. This approach has long been canvassed by lawyers representing claimants with MRSA but significantly has yet to be litigated to a conclusion.

In some cases the absence of adequate infection control procedures or the failure to adequately treat the infection, once acquired, support a more traditional negligence claim, although the recent decision in Andrews v Oxford Radcliffe Hospital NHS Health Trust has proved something of a set back, the trust successfully defending a claim when the judge preferred the defendants expert evidence.

Clostridium difficile or c.diff, is now replacing MRSA as the media focus in the hospital acquired infection saga. Like MRSA it is present in many people, suppressed by their immune system. Unlike MRSA, its active acquisition as an infection normally only occurs in hospital. The defendant’s argument in MRSA cases is frequently that the infection was acquired elsewhere, in c.diff cases this is rarely so. It is preventable by the rigorous application of simple hygiene controls. It is treatable with antibiotics. It may be fatal when not treated adequately, particularly in the elderly. Foot Anstey are in the early stages of investigating cases but are optimistic that successful outcomes will be achieved. As in the MRSA cases, these are not claims the NHSLA are keen to litigate for fear of the “floodgate” effect in the event of loss.

Published 26/04/2007.