¿Es justificable el reintegro del gasto en enfermos quirúrgicos testigos de Jehová tras asistencia sanitaria ajena al sistema público de salud? / Is the claiming of costs justifiable in Jehovah's witness surgical patients after healthcare that is not part of the public health system?
Cir. Esp. (Ed. impr.)
; 91(5): 287-293, mayo 2013. tab
Article
in Es
| IBECS
| ID: ibc-112336
Responsible library:
ES1.1
Localization: BNCS
RESUMEN
INTRODUCCIÓN:
Los testigos de Jehová rechazan la transfusión sanguínea. El conflicto aparece cuando el enfermo, afiliado a la sanidad pública, acude a centros de cirugía sin sangre, para después reclamar los gastos creados.OBJETIVOS:
Análisis de reclamaciones jurídicas de reintegro de gastos en enfermos testigos de Jehová tratados fuera del sistema de salud pública. Comparación de costes, respecto a costes mediante Grupo de Diagnóstico Relacionado (GRD) en un modelo hipotético de asistencia similar e igual estancia en nuestro hospital. MATERIAL YMÉTODOS:
Estudio retrospectivo de sentencias de tribunales Superior de Justicia, Supremo y Constitucional. Análisis económico utilizamos información clínica obtenida en la sentencia, para procesarlo en GRD, de nuestro hospital con 3MHealth Information Systems. Resultado/conclusiones:
El Estado no tiene el deber de financiar aspectos religiosos o ajenos al interés general. El establecimiento de protocolos de actuación evitaría conflictos éticos. Diferencias difícilmente justificables en costes solicitados, 431.001,66 €, y en relación a un modelo con igual estancia, 397.404,48 €ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION:
Jehovah's witnesses refuse blood transfusions. The conflict arises when the patient, entitled to public health treatment, come to surgical centres without blood, to later claim the costs incurred.OBJECTIVES:
To analyse the legal claims for the refunding of costs by Jehovah's witnesses treated outside the public health system. To make a cost comparison regarding this, using Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs) in a similar hypothetical healthcare model and equal to a stay in our hospital. MATERIAL ANDMETHODS:
A retrospective study was made of the High, Constitutional, and Supreme Court rulings. A cost analysis was made using the clinical information obtained in the rulings, to process this in the DRG in our hospital using 3MHealth Information Systems. Results/CONCLUSIONS:
The State is not obliged to finance religious aspects or those outside the general interest. The establishment of working protocols would avoid ethical conflicts. There are very difficult to justify differences in the costs demanded, 431,001.66 €, and compared to a model with an equal stay, 397,404.48 €
Search on Google
Collection:
06-national
/
ES
Database:
IBECS
Main subject:
Insurance Claim Review
Type of study:
Guideline
/
Health_economic_evaluation
/
Observational_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
Aspects:
Ethics
Limits:
Humans
Language:
Es
Journal:
Cir. Esp. (Ed. impr.)
Year:
2013
Document type:
Article