Treatment errors: Independent patient advice sees a need for political action
28.04.2022 15:59
The Independent Patient Advice Germany (UPD) provided advice on suspected treatment errors in around 5,000 cases in 2021. As in previous years, the majority of 1,239 consultations related to surgical procedures. Dentistry was in second place with 901 cases. Errors in conservative therapy, suspected misdiagnoses and suspicion of inadequate medical information take third, fourth and fifth place with 613, 553 and 354 consultations. From the UPD's point of view, the current legal regulations for dealing with suspected treatment errors are inadequate. There is also a crucial need for improvement in communication between doctors and patients.
The annual treatment error statistics from the medical service of the health insurance companies (MD) as well as the expert commissions and arbitration boards of the medical associations provide information on how many cases in which treatment errors were determined by experts in the corresponding year. The UPD's consultation numbers on the subject of treatment errors, on the other hand, reflect the process that takes place before the assessments: People usually turn to the UPD immediately after treatment if they suspect a treatment error or incorrectly omitted treatment.
The possible procedures and assessment options in the event of a treatment error are completely unknown to most people seeking advice at this point. Many people seeking advice are unsure and at a loss as to how to proceed. Those affected suspect that something has gone wrong during their treatment, but do not see any sensible option for action, also because, according to those seeking advice, the treating doctors or therapists are often not willing to have a clarifying discussion.
Improve communication between doctor and patient
At present, treating patients are not obliged to inform those affected of their own initiative about the suspicion of a possible treatment error. They only have to do this if the patient specifically asks or if a risk to the patient's health needs to be averted. “From the UPD’s point of view, the legal regulation is not expedient, if not even counterproductive. It does not help to strengthen trust or avoid legal proceedings,” says UPD managing director Thorben Krumwiede, and adds: “From our consultations, we know that for many people seeking advice, a clarifying conversation with the doctor and an apology would be much more important than one material compensation.”
If this is refused, patients will be left with a loss of trust and great uncertainty. Better doctor-patient communication would not only help to strengthen the relationship of trust, but also help to avoid lengthy and costly legal proceedings. Introduce hardship fund In the coalition agreement, the government parties agreed to strengthen the position of patients in the existing liability system in the event of damage caused by medical errors. For this purpose, a hardship fund with capped claims should be introduced.
“As UPD, we expressly welcome this plan and hope that it will be implemented quickly. Receiving financial support that they don’t have to pay back would be a real help for those affected,” says Heike Morris, legal director at the UPD. “However, the content of such a hardship fund should still be worked out. Representatives of all groups involved (patients, practitioners, insurers) should be included in this draft.”