Saturday, September 25

Doctors alert the Justice that the sentence on ozone therapy causes “clinical insecurity” to patients

The General Council of Official Medical Associations (CGCOM) has ruled through a letter addressed to the president of the General Council of the Judiciary, Carlos Lesmes, on the case of the judge who ordered to allow the application of “compassionate use” ozone therapy to a COVID-19 patient from the Hospital de la Plana in Castellón. “The medical profession is stupefied by this judicial pronouncement, which with the interest, probably, of helping the patient, places him in a situation of serious clinical insecurity, added to his current difficult situation,” states the letter, to which ElDiario has had access. .es, signed by Tomás Cobo, the president of the CGCOM.

On August 11, the Contentious-Administrative Court No. 1 of Castellón agreed to the request of the wife of the patient admitted since July for severe pneumonia derived from COVID-19 in the ICU of the Hospital de la Plana. The 49-year-old affected was not vaccinated, voluntarily. The approach implied the application of this therapy by a professional outside the hospital, “with all the connotations that this particularity introduces”, such as “a clear dysfunctionality and a conflict of patient follow-up and attribution of results”, indicates the statement of the Collegiate Medical Organization, which represents all registered professionals.

But the fact that the treatment was administered by workers outside the center’s staff was not the only reason why the centre’s health personnel refused to apply ozone therapy. This does not appear in the portfolio of services offered by the hospital, it does not have the approval of the Spanish Medicines Agency, and it lacks scientific evidence: “The health system has the obligation to guarantee that the techniques or products that can be chosen comply with the conditions of effectiveness or, at least, of innocuousness “, recalls the medical organization.

“Against all scientific criteria”

For this reason, the CGCOM considers the order, which obliges the center to apply the treatment, “against all the scientific criteria expressed, attending, surely to the desperation of the family and in disregard of the technical basis of the health officials who opposed it. “. Cobo also describes it as “judicial imposition of the initiation of a treatment that ignores the recommendations of the team in charge of patient care”, and that can “contribute to the dilution of responsibility and the patient to suffer the consequences.”

The president of the Collegiate Medical Organization calls attention to “the seriousness of the fact that a judicial ruling on clinical decisions may seriously alter the evaluation processes developed by scientific societies” and also the guidelines and evaluation of the National Health System.

For its part, the Ministry of Health of the Generalitat Valenciana has already ruled on this issue and is studying denouncing the patient’s family for their statements that the public hospital “hinders” the work of the medical team applying the treatment. In this sense, the minister Ana Barceló has defended the “professionalism of the health personnel” of the La Plana hospital.

Other associations and groups related to medicine are speaking these days before the decision of the Castellón court, such as the Federation of Spanish Scientific-Medical Associations (FACME), which has shown its support for the health team of the Hospital de la Plana, as well as its “rejection of the judicial imposition”, “concern about the consequences”, especially for the possible damage that this measure could have for the patient , “concern” about the “dangerous precedent of requesting unapproved treatments or pseudotherapies in other diseases.”

Finally, the medical council has offered to mediate to “avoid unfounded decisions in medical science and practice.” Likewise, the letter sent to the president of the General Council of the Judiciary points out that “the judicialization of Medicine, apart from the clinical foundations of care, introduces an element of distortion in clinical practice and a possible reason for confrontation between all the intervening parties “.



www.eldiario.es