Heidbreder Marc, van Treeck Bernhard
Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung Nord, Hammerbrookstraße 5, 20097, Hamburg, Deutschland.
Schmerz. 2019 Oct;33(5):437-442. doi: 10.1007/s00482-019-00397-1.
On March 10th 2017, the law amending narcotic and other regulations was expanded, thereby allowing physicians, irrespective of their specialization, to prescribe cannabis-derived medicines as magistral formulas or proprietary medicinal products at the expense of the German statutory health insurance (GKV). First prescription requires approval from the respective health insurance, which in turn commissions the Medical Advisory Board of the Statutory Health Insurance Funds (MDK) to prepare a medico-legal report.
Since § 31 Para. 6 of the German Social Code, Book V (SGB V) came into effect, a multitude of imponderables have been reported regarding reimbursement. Based on the experience of the MDK Nord, problems within the fields of patients, physicians and cannabis-derived medicines are illustrated.
Considering current literature, a retrospective review was conducted including approximately 2200 applications for reimbursement received in 2018 from patients residing in Hamburg and Schleswig-Holstein.
A relevant problem within the field of patients resulted from the lack of a specific definition of the term "severe (chronic) disease". Although this term is mentioned several times in SGB V, it is not put into concrete terms. Circumstances like multimorbidity are not taken into account. Another problem consisted in an irreproducible anticipation of treatment with cannabis-derived medicines. Within the field of physicians, a major problem was caused by missing, fragmentary or inconsistent information regarding disease and/or therapy. Hence, initially, almost one-third of all applications could not be appraised. Amongst various cannabis-derived medicines, dried flowers were found to be the most problematic regarding doses and effective levels. Notably, a marked increase in numbers of applications for reimbursement of therapy with pure cannabidiol was noted.
Numerous problems reported elsewhere and relating to prescription of cannabis-derived medicines were also observed by the MDK Nord. Many prescriptions reflected an uncertainty regarding therapeutic use of cannabis-derived medicines. Thus, one should consider restricting the prescription of cannabis-derived medicines to selected specialists. It should be noted that, in individual cases, e.g., patients suffering from neuropathic pain, treatment with cannabis-derived medicines seems to be a reasonable therapeutic option taking into account the risks and benefits.
2017年3月10日,修订麻醉药品及其他法规的法律得以扩展,从而允许医生,无论其专业领域如何,都可以开具大麻衍生药物作为自配制剂或专利药品,费用由德国法定医疗保险(GKV)承担。首次开具处方需要得到各自医疗保险机构的批准,而医疗保险机构又会委托法定医疗保险基金医疗咨询委员会(MDK)编写一份法医学报告。
自德国社会法典第五卷(SGB V)第31条第6款生效以来,已报告了大量关于报销的不确定因素。基于MDK Nord的经验,阐述了患者、医生和大麻衍生药物领域存在的问题。
参考当前文献,进行了一项回顾性研究,纳入了2018年从汉堡和石勒苏益格-荷尔斯泰因州的患者收到的约2200份报销申请。
患者领域的一个相关问题源于“严重(慢性)疾病”一词缺乏具体定义。尽管该词在SGB V中多次提及,但未给出具体定义。像多病共存这样的情况未被考虑在内。另一个问题在于对大麻衍生药物治疗效果难以再现的预期。在医生领域,一个主要问题是关于疾病和/或治疗的信息缺失、不完整或不一致。因此,最初几乎三分之一的申请无法评估。在各种大麻衍生药物中,干花在剂量和有效水平方面问题最大。值得注意的是,纯大麻二酚治疗报销申请数量显著增加。
MDK Nord也观察到了其他地方报告的与大麻衍生药物处方相关的众多问题。许多处方反映出对大麻衍生药物治疗用途的不确定性。因此,应考虑将大麻衍生药物的处方限制给选定的专科医生。需要注意的是,在个别情况下,例如患有神经性疼痛的患者,考虑到风险和益处,使用大麻衍生药物进行治疗似乎是一种合理的治疗选择。