Switzerland: “There is a flaw in the doctors’ control system”

Health in French -speaking Switzerland –“There is a flaw in the doctors’ control system”

Baptiste Hurni, vice-president of the Swiss patient organization (OSP), criticizes the lack of coordination between the cantons.

Posted today at 4:29 p.m.

• The current system allows sanctioned doctors to practice in another canton.
• Cantonal health services lack resources to check their history.
• The Mederg database offers limited information on the authorization of doctors.
• The cantons remain discreet on the reasons for withdrawal of authorization from doctors.

Our investigation reveals that in French -speaking Switzerland, several doctors prohibited from practicing in a canton can continue to practice in another. How is it possible?

Your survey shows that there is a flaw in the doctors’ control system, since the transmission of information between the cantons is incomplete. Imagine that a doctor is denounced by a patient and that he is withdrawn in the canton his permission permanently. He can then move to a neighboring canton, because it will not necessarily be aware of the previous sanctions. As long as it is, it can last for months …

In the Medical Professor Act (LPMED), it is however specified that the canton must check the doctor’s history before letting him practice.

Indeed. But health services in the cantons are often under-guess and they don’t always have time to do so. In addition, there can be strong political pressure to quickly bring in a general practitioner or a specialist in a region that lacks caregivers. So in this case, you can allow your installation and do checks later … For patients, it’s highly problematic: when you go to a doctor, you must have confidence in the system.

Very few people know that they can check on the Mederg database if their doctor has the right to practice or not.

Indeed. In addition, this site is not easy to handle.

And it contains very little information! We just know if a doctor is authorized or not and if his authorization has been removed permanently.

For me, it’s a real problem. We should know, even when a procedure against a doctor is in progress, what he is suspected. Even if the presumption of innocence applies, it is in my opinion of public interest to warn the patients that this professional is the subject of a survey. If a suspect is suspected of murder, he will go into preventive detention before being sentenced, because he represents a danger. Even if we cannot completely compare these situations, why not inform suspicions of serious violation of obligations in the case of doctors?

The cantons either do not communicate on the facts committed by doctors whose authorization has been withdrawn. What do you think is?

The vast majority of doctors do their work very well. According to the figures you have collected, the ban on practicing concerns only a few cases per year, the extreme minority of business. We can therefore assume that the alleged facts are serious – manifest errors, ill -treatment, etc. But it would be necessary to know more to be sure and systematically analyze jurisprudence.

The canton of Vaud believes that federal law prevents him from communicating more on the subject. What do you think?

Nothing prevents them from being more transparent when the sanction is pronounced. When the procedure is underway, I agree that it is more delicate: the tool in the law which allows for example to grant a temporary authorization to exercise, while the survey on the facts denounced succeeds, is very little used. It would also be useful for graduate doctors abroad, because obtaining the necessary documents is very long.