[Bioethical issues on the access to drugs in the practice of ophthalmology in Colombia]. / Cuestiones bioéticas relacionadas con el acceso a medicamentos en el ejercicio de la oftalmología en Colombia.

Ophthalmology is a high-cost specialty in terms of medical, surgical and technological innovation and treatment. It is worrisome that in some countries patients are affected in their visual health, and therefore in their quality of life because they do not have the necessary resources for timely access to medications, medical appointments or surgical procedures. We searched in four electronic databases (ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, ClinicalKey and SciELO), as well as in books on bioethics and Colombian laws, for articles related to bioethical issues and access to medicines in the exercise of ophthalmology. We reflect on the problem of access to ophthalmological drugs, with particular interest on how to apply the principles of bioethics on the clinical practice of patients with ophthalmological conditions. Ethical considerations are approached from the principles of Beauchamp and Childress, especially regarding the principle of justice, in order to provide health professionals in this field with arguments for medical and ethical decisions that benefit the healthcare and access to medicines for patients with ophthalmological conditions.

La oftalmología se constituye como una especialidad de alto costo en lo que respecta a tratamiento médico, quirúrgico y de innovación tecnológica. Es preocupante que en algunos países los pacientes se vean afectados en su salud visual, y por ende en su calidad de vida, por no contar con los recursos necesarios para un acceso oportuno a medicamentos, citas médicas o procedimientos quirúrgicos. A partir de la búsqueda de artículos relacionados con cuestiones bioéticas y el acceso a medicamentos en el ejercicio de la oftalmología en cuatro bases de datos electrónicas (ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, ClinicalKey y SciELO ), así como en libros de bioética y leyes de la jurisdicción colombiana, realizamos una reflexión sobre el problema del acceso a los medicamentos oftalmológicos, centrándonos en el interés por la aplicación de la bioética en la práctica clínica y en el acceso a medicamentos de los pacientes con patologías oftalmológicas. Las consideraciones éticas se abordan desde una mirada del modelo principialista de Beauchamp y Childress, en especial considerando el principio de justicia, de modo que brinde a los profesionales de la salud en este campo, argumentos para la toma de decisiones médicas y éticas que beneficien la atención y el acceso a medicamentos de los pacientes con patologías oftalmológicas.

Health policy regulations pertaining to advanced surgical devices-their socio-economic effects on ophthalmology practice.

The Israel Ministry of Health enacted regulations that aim to reduce private expenditure on healthcare services and mitigate social inequality. According to the modified rules, which went into effect in the second half of 2016, patients who undergo surgery in a private hospital and are covered by their healthcare provider's supplemental insurance (SI) make only a basic co-payment.The modified regulations limited the option of self-payment for advanced devices not covered by national health basket, meaning that patients for whom such devices are indicated had to pay privately for the entire procedure. These regulations applied to all medical and surgical devices not covered by national health insurance (NHI).Toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) are a case in point. These advanced lenses are implanted during cataract surgery to correct corneal astigmatism and, in indicated cases, obviate the need for complex eyeglasses postoperatively. Toric IOL implantation has been shown to be highly cost-effective in both economic and quality-of-life terms. Limitations of the use of these advanced IOLs threatened to increase social inequality.In 2017, further adjustments of the regulations were made which enabled supplemental charges for these advanced IOLs, performed through the SI programs of the healthcare medical organizations (HMOs). Allowing additional payment for these lenses at a fixed pre-set price made it possible to apply a supplemental part of the insurance package to the surgery itself. In mid 2018 these IOLs were included without budget in the national health basket, allowing for self-payment for the additional cost in addition to the basic coverage for all patients with NHI.This case study suggests that, in their efforts to enhance health care equity, policymakers may benefit if exercising due caution when limiting the extent to which SI programs can charge co-payments. This is because, when a service or product is not available via the basic NHI benefits package, limiting SI co-payments can sometimes result in a boomerang effect - leading to an increase in inequality rather than the sought-after decrease in inequality.

Cuestiones bioéticas relacionadas con el acceso a medicamentos en el ejercicio de la oftalmología en Colombia / Bioethical issues on the access to drugs in the practice of ophthalmology in Colombia

Resumen La oftalmología se constituye como una especialidad de alto costo en lo que respecta a tratamiento médico, quirúrgico y de innovación tecnológica. Es preocupante que en algunos países los pacientes se vean afectados en su salud visual, y por ende en su calidad de vida, por no contar con los recursos necesarios para un acceso oportuno a medicamentos, citas médicas o procedimientos quirúrgicos. A partir de la búsqueda de artículos relacionados con cuestiones bioéticas y el acceso a medicamentos en el ejercicio de la oftalmología en cuatro bases de datos electrónicas (ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, ClinicalKey y SciELO ), así como en libros de bioética y leyes de la jurisdicción colombiana, realizamos una reflexión sobre el problema del acceso a los medicamentos oftalmológicos, centrándonos en el interés por la aplicación de la bioética en la práctica clínica y en el acceso a medicamentos de los pacientes con patologías oftalmológicas. Las consideraciones éticas se abordan desde una mirada del modelo principialista de Beauchamp y Childress, en especial considerando el principio de justicia, de modo que brinde a los profesionales de la salud en este campo, argumentos para la toma de decisiones médicas y éticas que beneficien la atención y el acceso a medicamentos de los pacientes con patologías oftalmológicas.

Abstract Ophthalmology is a high-cost specialty in terms of medical, surgical and technological innovation and treatment. It is worrisome that in some countries patients are affected in their visual health, and therefore in their quality of life because they do not have the necessary resources for timely access to medications, medical appointments or surgical procedures. We searched in four electronic databases (ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, ClinicalKey and SciELO), as well as in books on bioethics and Colombian laws, for articles related to bioethical issues and access to medicines in the exercise of ophthalmology. We reflect on the problem of access to ophthalmological drugs, with particular interest on how to apply the principles of bioethics on the clinical practice of patients with ophthalmological conditions. Ethical considerations are approached from the principles of Beauchamp and Childress, especially regarding the principle of justice, in order to provide health professionals in this field with arguments for medical and ethical decisions that benefit the healthcare and access to medicines for patients with ophthalmological conditions.

[Vitamins for the eyes? Risks and opportunities for physician and patient]. / Vitamine für das Auge? Risiken und Chancen für Arzt und Patienten.

This article discusses the effects of dietetic measures and specialized food supplements on age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and diabetic retinopathy. The sale of products in doctors' offices is already prohibited by laws governing the medical profession. The results of the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) concerning high doses of vitamins and zinc cannot simply be transferred to other doses and substances. Furthermore, there are health risks that have to be examined. Opportunities could arise for both doctor and patient if the AREDS formulation were granted authorization to be marketed as a medicinal product; however, a certain protective effect can be expected only for specific forms of AMD after a careful risk-benefit analysis and assessment within the statutory marketing authorization procedure for medicinal products.

[Changes in the G-DRG System from 2003 to 2005 in Ophthalmology--Ophthalmologic G-DRG 2003 to 2005]. / Anderungen des G-DRG-Systems von 2003 bis 2005 in der Augenheilkunde -- Ophthalmologische G-DRGs von 2003 bis 2005.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to illustrate the effect of the extensive changes of the German DRG System on reimbursement of clinical ophthalmology during the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. METHODS: All ophthalmologic patients treated as in-patients at the Department of Ophthalmology at the University Munich during the year 2003 served as a reference data basis. By means of appropriate software those cases were then re-grouped according to the G-DRG classification of the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. This resulted in different reimbursements caused only by system changes for an exemplary hospital of maximum medical care. In addition, the same calculations were performed for four virtual, typical clinics based on the calculation data of the "Institut für Entgeltsysteme (InEK)". For those four clinics it was assumed that 80 % of the cases came from one of the subspecialties retina, glaucoma, cataract or strabismus surgery. RESULTS: Changes in the G-DRG system caused the sample hospital of maximum care to loose 8.5 % case mix index (CMI) during the period of 2003 to 2005. For three of the four virtual, typical ophthalmological clinics the theoretic reimbursement conditions also deteriorated: retina surgery -- 10.6 %, glaucoma surgery - 15.8 % and cataract surgery -- 17.9 % CMI. Only strabismus surgery showed an increase of + 5.6 % in CMI during the period examined. CONCLUSION: Over the years 2003 to 2005 the CMI clearly deteriorated for many ophthalmological subspecialties given otherwise identical conditions. To calculate the changes specifically for an individual hospital, the individual base rates have to be considered.

OIG offers guidance on the legality of telemedicine arrangements.

Telemedicine increasingly is being used to enable patients in rural areas to gain access to specialists. At the same time, concerns have arisen about the legality of certain telemedicine applications. To date, the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued two advisory opinions stating it would not impose sanctions on two specific telemedicine arrangements, where potential violations of the antikickback statute could exist. These opinions, while applying only to the specific arrangements in question, provide physicians with clues to the OIG's thinking on various arrangements they may wish to initiate.

Enucleation for ritual practices.

Five cases of enucleation performed on seeing eyes are presented, highlighting the dangers this procedure poses to the patient. It also presents the problems this can pose to the development of ophthalmology.

Perforation of the globe during retrobulbar injection: medicolegal aspects of four cases.

Perforation or penetration of the globe is a risk of retrobulbar injection of anesthetic. Visual outcome following this complication depends on the severity of injury to the retina and on the physician's ability to promptly recognize and treat it. Four cases are presented to illustrate factors that contribute to proper management of this complication as well as to a favorable medicolegal position for the physician.