What is this claim that is being shared rapidly on Facebook?

We received requests for an image to be shared on social media. The point is that it has been decided that German clinics will be cut off from money for emergency care.

This is what the status post looks like:

image
Image in plain text:

On Friday it was decided that 628 clinics would be cut off from funding for emergency care.

This is the largest clearcut in the health sector in decades.

Germany is supposedly so rich. So what's the point?!

Share this information with your friends.

The fact check

Almost. It wasn't Jens Spahn directly, even if that was conceivable, but the Federal Joint Committee (GBA). This is made up of 13 members, including three impartialists (one of whom is the chair), five from the Association of Statutory Health Insurance, two from the German Hospital Association, two from the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, one from the Federal Dental Association.

You can find a list of members at the following link .

Jens Spahn (Minister of Health) is not a member of the GBA, but welcomes this step to the Handelsblatt:

“This is an important step towards improving emergency care. No emergency room has to close because of the new quality requirements. Every hospital is still obliged to provide medical assistance in an emergency.”
Source

The background

The background to this restructuring is that the clinics now affected have hardly treated any emergencies to date. Rather, it is the case that these clinics had free beds in the rest of the building and were able to increase their occupancy through incoming emergencies, even if there was actually no medical need for hospital treatment. This increases the clinic's financial resources, as it is determined by flat rates per case. These people could also receive medical care in local practices.

Clinics in rural regions receive so-called security surcharges so that emergency care is maintained in structurally weak areas. The GBA also describes this step as a benefit for patients, who will in future be able to be treated within 30 minutes by clinics with the highest professional equipment and sufficient specialists. A 30-minute wait in the emergency room sounds good at first, but not when the travel time there increases by a factor of x. A study recommended by the hospitals' counterpart, the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, suggests that travel times will increase to "just" one hour in the future. Clinics that no longer officially offer emergency care should therefore also be able to provide emergency care (again) in the future and will also be reimbursed for this. Countries are allowed to create additional exceptions for individual clinics if these clinics have special areas of focus that are of great importance despite the low number of emergencies. The GBA's template is not really meaningful because everything remains very vague in its design.

While the statutory health insurance doctors are happy about this decision, resistance is forming on the part of the hospital doctors (represented by the German Hospital Society DKG):

“The DKG appeals to the federal states not to recognize the partially excessive criteria as part of their responsibility for hospital planning. Whether a hospital has 4 or 6 ventilation places available in intensive care cannot be an exclusion criterion for the arrival of an ambulance with patients in need. (…) It is completely unacceptable that the authorization to admit emergency patients for hospital treatment should depend on whether an association of statutory health insurance physicians has granted the hospital the authorization to treat outpatient emergencies.”
Source

Result:

The patients requiring care will, among other things, have to travel longer to a larger clinic. However, you can then expect a higher level of professional staffing there. Acute emergencies can still be treated “on site” in the clinic. However, many are no longer able to use their beds. It remains to be seen whether a clinic will have to close in the long term.

Author: Gordana R. – mimikama.org


If you enjoyed this post and value the importance of well-founded information, become part of the exclusive Mimikama Club! Support our work and help us promote awareness and combat misinformation. As a club member you receive:

📬 Special Weekly Newsletter: Get exclusive content straight to your inbox.
🎥 Exclusive video* “Fact Checker Basic Course”: Learn from Andre Wolf how to recognize and combat misinformation.
📅 Early access to in-depth articles and fact checks: always be one step ahead.
📄 Bonus articles, just for you: Discover content you won't find anywhere else.
📝 Participation in webinars and workshops : Join us live or watch the recordings.
✔️ Quality exchange: Discuss safely in our comment function without trolls and bots.

Join us and become part of a community that stands for truth and clarity. Together we can make the world a little better!

* In this special course, Andre Wolf will teach you how to recognize and effectively combat misinformation. After completing the video, you have the opportunity to join our research team and actively participate in the education - an opportunity that is exclusively reserved for our club members!


Notes:
1) This content reflects the current state of affairs at the time of publication. The reproduction of individual images, screenshots, embeds or video sequences serves to discuss the topic. 2) Individual contributions were created through the use of machine assistance and were carefully checked by the Mimikama editorial team before publication. ( Reason )