Data protection: Doctor sues against mandatory connection to health network

On Thursday, the Social Court in Munich dealt with fee cuts for doctors who resist the electronic disclosure of patient data. The ophthalmologist Gernot Petzold from Kulmbach complained. He opposes the deduction of one to 2.5 percent of the cash payment. According to Petzold, the background is medical confidentiality and the security of patient data. Some doctors have concerns about data protection when patient data is passed on electronically via the telematics infrastructure – the health network. Superficially it is about the money, but behind the lawsuit is the concern for the protection of sensitive health data.

Model lawsuit for thousands of doctors

It’s about a model lawsuit, says Petzold, who sits on the board of the Bavarian Medical Association (BFAV). The Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KVB) is the complainant. For several years, physicians and psychotherapists have been obliged to connect to the so-called telematics infrastructure (TI), via which patient data is distributed centrally. This means that people who are not bound by medical confidentiality could also have access to the data, argues Petzold. “I cannot control who can use the data. This violates the patient’s right to privacy.”

According to earlier data, according to the BFAV, around 2,800 doctors and psychotherapists in Bavaria had not joined the TI for this reason, according to more recent figures there are said to be 1,600. You have to accept fee cuts. “I have to pay a few thousand euros a quarter for my right to medical confidentiality,” says Petzold.

Similar lawsuits have already been dismissed

According to a spokeswoman, the social court in Munich had already dismissed a similar complaint by a dentist last November. Other lawsuits are pending. According to the Ärzte Zeitung, a doctor had also complained in Stuttgart without first-instance success. It is assumed that the Federal Social Court will have to decide at the highest level, said the court spokeswoman. It is about fundamental questions, in particular whether the legal basis of the obligation is compatible with higher-ranking law such as the Basic Law and the General Data Protection Regulation of the EU.

Petzold said that certain diagnoses are already stored on the electronic health card. As long as the patient remains in control of his own data, that’s fine. But it could not be that such data would be sent across the republic. “I see the entire medical treatment in danger if people can no longer talk to the doctor in confidence. Such data must remain with the doctor,” says Petzold. Various institutions and companies, including pharmaceutical companies, IT companies and manufacturers of medical devices, are interested in the data.

In addition, there are always some successful hacker attacks – only recently on an IT service provider for health insurance companies. “I don’t want my practice server to be connected to the Internet. I have a fully digitized practice, but the system is self-contained,” said Petzold. Representatives of the medical profession wanted to travel to the trial. However, there are only 15 seats for the public. According to the court spokeswoman, the largest available room in the court was chosen, but the judge issued restrictions due to the risk of infection.

(mack)