IMA’s
stand on Life-Saving Machines, Devices, and Equipment
New
Delhi, February 25, 2016: Life-saving machines and devices
such as pacemakers, CPAP, BiPAP, orthopedic implants, intra cardiac valve
replacements, vascular stents, relevant laboratory diagnostic tests, X-ray and
such similar implants and machines are often prescribed by registered medical
practitioners to their patients.
“The Indian Medical Association (IMA) believes that all such life-saving equipment’s are and should be fully covered in insurance policies/Mediclaim/PSU reimbursement etc. Accordingly, IMA has sent out a notice to all its 2.5 lakh members advising them to educate their patients, who have been prescribed any such life-saving equipment as well as helping them get their treatment reimbursed”, said Dr SS Agarwal – National President IMA and Padma Shri Awardee Dr KK Aggarwal – Honorary Secretary General IMA and President HCFI
The IMA policy is validated by the following judgments:
1. In case titled as “The New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Versus Mrs. Sonali Sareen & Anr”, during the
course of treatment in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, the patient was recommended to
purchase the CPAP/BiPAP machine. Since the purchase of the machine was
recommended by the treating doctor, the complainant purchased the same for a
sum of Rs. 70,000/- and thereafter lodged the claim under the cashless
insurance policy. The Ld. District Forum had held that purchase of
machine was the part of the treatment and without this machine the patient
could not have been treated. Thus, denial of the payment of this price of the
machine is tantamount to deficiency of service on the part of the insurance
company. The said order and judgement passed by Ld. District Forum had been
duly accepted by the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide
order dated 09.12.2014.
2. Further, in the matter titled as
“New India Assurance Co. Ltd. versus Ganashyamadas A. Thakur,” vide order and
judgment dated 07.02.2014, Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
had held that:
“The fact that Respondent/Complainant
wife had taken treatment as an in-patient at M/s Bhagwan Mahaveer Jain Hospital
for Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea is not in dispute. It is further an admitted
fact that on discharge she was advised CPAP usage at night as a continuing part
of the treatment to regulate her breathing and ensure that there was adequate
inflow of oxygen since the CPAP had to be used along with 1-2 litre
oxygen/minute. Keeping in view this important fact, we find force in the
conclusion reached by the Fora below that like the pacemaker, which is used to
control abnormal heart rhythms, the CPAP device though not an implant is a
continuous positive airway pressure to keep the airways open and thus like the
pacemaker is not only an integral part of treatment but necessary for patient
survival. No doubt Clause 2.4 of the policy does not mention CPAP but it is
obviously not a comprehensive list because it talks of various devices like
pacemaker. As stated above, since the CPAP device like the pacemaker is
important for the patient treatment and survival, it may not be reasonable to
exclude it. Apart from this, in the exclusion clause, on which the
Petitioner/OP had relied before the Fora below, it is stated that the Insurance
Company will not be liable to make any payment in respect of the equipments, such
as braces, non-durable implants, eyeglasses, contact lenses etc. These may be
important but are not life-saving equipments unlike the CPAP. So far as the
hospitalization of Respondent/Complainant daughter is concerned, we also agree
with the conclusion reached by the Fora below and directing the Petitioner/OP
for reimbursement of the same.”
No comments:
Post a Comment