Treatment in other EU countries for UK NHS patients

Citation

(2002), "Treatment in other EU countries for UK NHS patients", International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 15 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhcqa.2002.06215aab.007

Treatment in other EU countries for UK NHS patients

Treatment in other EU countries for UK NHS patients

In August the UK Secretary of State for Health, the Right Honourable Alan Milburn MP, made it clear to health authorities and primary care trusts that they are able to commission services, for groups of patients, from other European countries as part of their wider efforts to reduce waiting times for NHS treatment.

For over 25 years, individual patients have been able to go to EU countries for treatment under the existing E112 scheme, on an individual basis, UK patients have been able to go to EU countries for treatment for over a quarter of a century. Last year the NHS funded 1,100 people to receive treatment abroad. However, a ruling of the European Court of Justice in July 2001, raised the issue of authorisation for such treatment. In the Court's view, whilst prior authorisation was necessary in the context of a system of agreements to provide health care, because it makes it possible to ensure that there is sufficient and permanent access to a balanced range of high-quality hospital treatment on the national territory, to ensure that costs are controlled and to prevent any wastage of financial, technical and human resources. Despite this, any conditions that must be satisfied in order to obtain prior authorisation must be justified and must satisfy the principle of proportionality.

The two conditions considered were that the treatment must be regarded as normal in the professional circles concerned; and that the treatment abroad must be necessary,

In the first case, the Court considered that the condition that the proposed hospital treatment in another Member State must be regarded as normal is acceptable only in so far as it refers to what is sufficiently tried and tested by international medical science. So far as the second condition, the necessity of the proposed treatment, was concerned, the Court's view was that authorisation of treatment in another Member State could only be refused if the patient could receive the same or equally effective treatment without undue delay.

In October, it was announced that Portsmouth, East Kent and West Sussex/East Surrey are to be test-beds for new arrangements for sending groups of patients to other EU countries to receive treatment on the NHS.

Mr Milburn said:

Health Authorities and Primary Care Trusts when commissioning services from other European countries have to ensure the highest clinical standards and best value for the NHS. Following the test-runs, in Portsmouth, East Kent and West Sussex/East Surrey, robust guidance will be sent out to the service later this year. The first patients in the South East will be offered the option of going to other European countries for low risk procedures, such as cataract surgery or joint replacements, after a full clinical assessment shows that the treatment meets their needs. Lessons learnt from these three areas in the South East, where patients have in the past experienced long waits for operations, will inform guidance for the NHS on purchasing care in the EU. This will help to ensure that by the New Year all Health Authorities and Primary Care Trusts will be in a stronger position to send groups of patients abroad as part of their wider efforts to reduce waiting times.

However, a medical administration company has warned of the potential costs and barriers that could face the NHS in setting up overseas treatment’for patients. Richard Freeman, founder of Medibureau, a medical case management and appointment booking system, believes that the logistics involved in sending patients for treatment abroad is likely to place a major burden on the NHS's already stretched administration resources. He also believes that there are a number of other hurdles and possible pitfalls which face the NHS. These include question marks over whether NHS Trusts will be liable for medical negligence claims arising from overseas treatment, the vetting procedures for consultants and the need for secure sharing of medical case notes. He says that his company has been developed to reduce many of the traditional tasks faced by the private healthcare and insurance sectors, and that the NHS will require this kind of back up in booking overseas appointments for UK patients and organising the logistics of travel with medical support teams etc.