Federal court of justice verdict on the racz catheter

New ground operations involve the risk of liability for various reasons, and this applies both to the treatment and to the conduct of the interview to give the patient the necessary information. When the appropriate standards are observed, however, both sources of error can be avoided. Basically, methods that break new ground are allowed and come under the heading of doctors' freedom to choose the therapy. It is only when the new method involves a higher risk than the conventional method that there must be specific reasons (e.g. a better prognosis) justifying the novel method. If the side-effects of a method are not yet adequately known, however, as for the minimally invasive epidural catheter technique (Racz method) used in the case considered by the Federal Court of Justice, the attendant doctor is required to perform constant, and if necessary immediate, monitoring examinations to ensure that such side effects are not present or to react without delay if any do occur. The carefulness standard of the "prudent doctor" must be applied in these circumstances. It is also important that the patient is informed on the novel nature of the procedure (and the risks inherent in it, which may not yet be well known).