PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

France · Question · Question écrite

16312

Question 16312 — health

openFrance· National Assembly· FR

Introduced

23 June 2026

Last action

Status

posée

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

23 June 2026

Summary

Mr. Christophe Marion draws the attention of the Minister of Health, Families, Autonomy and Persons with Disabilities to the question of regularizing the framework for the use of exploration equipment by opticians and eyeglass 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 medical underdensity, 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 an opinion medical 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 constitute diagnostic procedures, the data being 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 not justified either medically or legally. The 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 country, 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. The MP wishes to know whether it intends to put an end to this distortion by adopting a regulatory text authorizing opticians and eyewear manufacturers to carry out, within the framework of cooperation protocols defined under medical responsibility, in person as well as 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 practices already in force in private practices and with the recommendations made by the IGAS more than five years ago. Failing that, he asks her if it would be in favor of the opening of 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.