The German Society for Integrated Care is largely critical of the DPVG
16.11.2020 16:00
In today's hearing in the Bundestag, the German Society for Integrated Care in Health Care (DGIV) gave an ambivalent assessment of the changes in Section 140a SGB V, as they are to be implemented by the federal government with the Health Care and Care Improvement Act (GPVG): “Of course Facilitation of selective contractual care concepts in the area of so-called 'special care' is to be welcomed, but with such patchwork we are moving further and further away from the necessary paradigm shift in order to leave the sector boundaries in our health system behind us," said the new DGIV board chairman Prof. Dr. mult. Eckhard Nagel during the hearing.
From the DGIV's point of view, the possibilities for expanding selective contracts both across the various professional groups and beyond the boundaries of the social codes are particularly positive, says Prof. Nagel. This takes into account the real need for care, which does not stop at the border between health and nursing care insurance. The integration of other health professions into care contracts in accordance with Section 140a also corresponds to the actual care needs - for example in the complex field of treating chronic wounds. “All legislative measures will have to be measured against this reality,” emphasized the DGIV chairman.
The removal of the cost-effectiveness requirement in the previous 140a contracts is also welcome. Exhausting arguments with the Federal Office for Social Security (BAS) on this point in particular correspond to the repeated complaints of many DGIV members, says Prof. Nagel. “To be honest, we have never understood why politicians, on the one hand, expect competitive supply models from the supply partners, but on the other hand, put a stop to the possible additional costs of better approaches, when at the same time there is already cost competition on the health insurance side,” explains Nagel. It is good and right that this “competition with the handbrake on” should now be put to an end.
“However, we have significant difficulties with the fundamental tendency towards patchwork, which is once again evident in the GPVG,” criticizes the DGIV boss. Politicians must be clear that for 20 years, countless attempts have been made to overcome the various sector boundaries, especially between outpatient and inpatient care. “We have to state today that none of these attempts have led to a fundamental change in this misery. And the GPVG measures will not change that,” emphasizes Nagel. Politicians are called upon to finally present fundamental changes to SGB V, which primarily correspond to the need of chronic patients for sector-independent care. “Not least due to the corona pandemic, we will not make any decisive progress in this legislative period. “Unfortunately,” the DGIV chairman concluded, “unfortunately the GPVG will not change this in the slightest.”