/picture alliance, SZ Photo, Florian Peljak
Berlin – The announcement by Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (SPD) that investor-supported medical care centers (iMVZ) would have to be “ultimately banned” after appropriate consultations in the Bundestag is causing a lack of understanding among MVZ associations.
“The debate so far is obviously based on the fact that if medical operators are not sufficiently constrained, doctors will fill the gap and discover their previously suppressed entrepreneurial side,” commented Peter Velling, Chairman of the Board of the Federal Association of Medical Centers. Health care. (BMVZ), the comment.
This expectation is “naive and unrealistic”. What is urgently needed is clear regulatory support for MVZ medical providers. The BMVZ highlighted that the biggest obstacles were currently placed in the path of this group of sponsors due to the existing paragraph 95 of the Social Code V (SGB V).
In the association’s opinion, legal adjustments should therefore aim to constructively ensure that it is easier for contracted doctors to perform their role as entrepreneurs and managers of MVZ practices and also to practically review the transfer of shareholder shares to doctors employees. In this way, MVZ medical start-ups could be promoted.
From the Federal Association of Health Care Center Operators (BBMV) it was said that there were numerous reports showing that MVZ were providers of indispensable services in outpatient care and that no connection could be proven between the quality provided and the property.
It is therefore incomprehensible that Health Minister Lauterbach, who attaches great importance to evidence, is acting so emotionally on this issue. In January last year, the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG), in response to a request from the opposition, the BBMV emphasized that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that there were links between the well-being of patients and certain MVZ sponsorships.
“The limits of what is constitutionally viable have been clearly demonstrated several times. We will evaluate a possible legislative proposal based on this and base the next steps on it”, explained Dirk Knüppel, 1st vice-president of the BBMV.
“If regulatory proposals do not aim to improve the care situation of patients, but specifically target a specific service provider, constitutionality is quickly exceeded. These legal limits must also be taken into account by the parliamentary groups involved in the parliamentary process.” , said Knüppel.
The 128th German Medical Association recently called for measures to legally regulate iMVZ to be implemented in the Health Care Strengthening Act (GVSG) – however, a ban was not advocated.
High dynamics in establishing iMVZ and iMVZ chains require “timely and effective framework specifications for MVZ operation.” These should allow, on the one hand, to continue to enjoy the advantages of the MVZ and, on the other hand, make it difficult to influence medical decisions in the iMVZ for commercial reasons, according to the resolution.
The independence of medical decisions from commercial disincentives must be structurally better guaranteed through appropriate regulatory measures. Furthermore, the concentration of care provision on particularly profitable services must be countered, which would have a detrimental effect on patient-centred care and care delivery. © aha/aerzteblatt.de