AHPBMT seeks removal of mandatory requirement of doctor’s advice for medical test from draft CEA Rules, 2019

The Association of the Hospital and Practicing Biochemists and Medical Technologists (AHPBMT) has sought removal of mandatory requirement of a doctor’s advice to undertake medical tests from draft Clinical Establishments (Central Government) Second Amendment Rules, 2019.

The draft amendment released by Union health and family welfare ministry last month says in serial no. 1 that “Medical tests should normally be undertaken on the advice of a doctor”.

“This is utter violation of the Constitution of India Article 21 “Right to Life and Personal Liberty” when a person is deprived of matters concerning to his/her life and personal liberty by the state or if a citizen is prevented from liberty of choice of healthcare. It violets the “Charter of Patients’ Rights” prepared by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and Consumer Protection Act 1986. Patients with chronic illnesses, hereditary and lifestyle diseases require frequent tests and even healthy person needs checkups for preventive health concerns. Since it is concerned with the citizen’s right of choice for his/her healthcare, the onus lies with the state to approach public first before unilaterally deciding. Imposing “referral practices” may encourage more kickbacks which is an open secret. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said AHPBMT in its suggestions to the health ministry on the draft amendment.

It said every citizen should have choice for medical laboratory investigation tests, with or without any reference from a medical doctor.

Serial no III- Human Resource Column 3 of the draft says “Wherever interpretation of lab results or opinion there on are required registered Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) medical practitioner is essential.”

AHPBMT has sought substitution of above provision with the following provision, “Interpretation of lab results or opinion there on when required, registered Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) medical practitioner is essential.”

Talking about interpretation of lab results/opinion v/s authorized signatory in basic composite labs, MZ Baig, general secretary of AHPBMT said “A lab technologist is trained to conduct technical analysis of a sample and qualified enough to authorize the results and the accuracy of test at basic composite laboratories as these lab results do not reflect or require any interpretation or opinion while a MBBS is basically trained to be a physician. Clinical examination and laboratory analysis are separate specialties. If a physician (medical practitioner) is authorized to sign the lab report, it might create a conflict of interests. The physician on the basis of clinical examination along with lab reports concludes diagnosis, gives his opinion to the patient and prescribes the treatment.”

India is a widely spread country with thousands’ of backward districts where even a registered medical practitioner is not available to the patients. As per the government figures (2015), there are still 17,270 primary health centres and community health centres which are running without a registered medical practitioner. There is a short fall of 20,525. What will happen in such area where even a registered medical practitioner is not available? Therefore a MBBS physician has no role to play in a basic composite lab, he opined.

As per the draft, lab technicians with qualifications such as DMLT, MLT, B.Sc. MLT, M.Sc. MLT or PhD MLT from recognised universities or institutes can certify medical test reports.

AHPBMT suggested that along with the above qualification holders, B.Sc. and M.Sc. in basic sciences, such as, B.Sc. chemistry, microbiology, life sciences who are existing in-service medical laboratory staff and self-employed technologists (at least for the last five years prior to the date of notification) should be considered at par. The rule should be enforced not retrospectively because the existing employed and self-employed professionals were given livelihood, when no such rules were enacted, it stated.

Source: http://www.pharmabiz.com/NewsDetails.aspx?aid=115230&sid=1