PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

France · Question · Question écrite

16074

Question 16074 — health

openFrance· National Assembly· FR

Introduced

16 June 2026

Last action

Status

posée

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

16 June 2026

Summary

Ms. Alexandra Martin (Alpes-Maritimes) draws the attention of the Minister of Health, Families, Autonomy and People with Disabilities to the regularization of the framework for the use of exploration equipment by opticians and eyewear makers in ophthalmology practices and in the context of teleexpertise. France is experiencing a documented crisis in access to ophthalmological care: 55 out of 96 departments are in a situation of under-density medical, some not reaching 50% coverage. The March 2026 studies by FHF/Ipsos BVA and IRDES/HCAAM confirm the continued worsening of this situation. In this context, ophthalmological teleexpertise at the optician has emerged as a concrete and effective response, framed by the decree of June 3, 2021. Platforms deployed in nearly 2,000 establishments have already allowed more than 200,000 patients to access medical advice without delay, thus providing operational proof of the relevance of the model. However, a clear distortion remains in the current legal framework: opticians already carry out, in many private practices, in cooperation with ophthalmologists, examinations such as OCT, retinophotography, contactless tonometry and even corneal topography. These acts are non-invasive, automated and do not do not constitute diagnostic procedures; the data is transmitted to the doctor for interpretation, under his full responsibility. However, this same exercise, strictly identical in its nature and medical conditions, remains devoid of a formal framework for opticians, outside the office, whether or not they enroll in a telemedicine course. This inconsistency is justified neither on a medical level nor on a legal level. IGAS recommended from 2020 to extend the system to the ophthalmologist/optician-eyeglass maker relationship and to define a list of non-invasive materials that can be used by these professionals; recommendations that have remained without legislative translation for more than five years. Opticians and eyeglass makers are recognized as health professionals in their own right. Their network of more than 13,000 optical establishments covers the entire territory, including the most deserted areas. The delegation of non-medical tasks to qualified health professionals could be precisely one of the levers that public authorities intend to mobilize to respond to the crisis in healthcare provision. Also, she asks him if the Government intends to put an end to this distortion by adopting a regulatory text authorizing opticians and eyewear makers to produce, within the framework of cooperation protocols defined under medical responsibility, both face-to-face and remotely, additional non-invasive examinations transmitted to the doctor for interpretation, consistent with automated technologies and the numerous artificial intelligence assistance solutions available in compliance with European regulations, with the practices already in force in private practices and with the recommendations formulated by the IGAS there are more than five years. Failing that, she asks him if he would be in favor of opening a five-year experiment in territories identified as ophthalmological deserts or for vulnerable people, in order to assess the impact of these practices combining an increase in the skills of opticians and teleexpertise on the quality of care, treatment times and the efficiency of the patient journey.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.