The new policy by the Ministry of Health (MOH) utilising the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 (Act 723) for the purpose of price transparency at private hospitals and clinics, which brings the private health care sector under the ambit of two differing Acts, is unacceptable and unreasonable.
The manner of price display being requested of private clinics and other private health care facilities is burdensome and does not reflect patients’ expectation. Furthermore, it is not applied similarly to other sectors already gazetted under Act 723. This is an overreach of authority and burdensome.
The threat of enforcement, even though “delegated”, is real, but no discussions have ever been held concerning this.
Doctors Support Price Transparency
The notion that private clinics and facilities are against price transparency is incorrect and misleading. Patients have always had the right to know the prices charged for medications. Patients have always had the right to request for a prescription to obtain medications elsewhere if they feel the prices charged at the clinic is high. Patients have a right to choose which facility they want to go to including the option of going to a government facility if so desired. Patients’ rights are already enshrined under the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998 (Act 586).
We emphasise that private medical practitioners are not against price transparency. However, the implementation and enforcement must be fair and practical. Medicine price display requirements should not impose excessive administrative burdens that disrupt patient care. Regular monitoring and updating of medicine prices will increase operational costs and require additional manpower, which could affect service efficiency.
Private health care facilities are not retail businesses and should not be regulated under any non-medical Act or by any authority other than the Ministry of Health. Doctors are health care professionals who provide patient care, not retail operators selling medicines at the request of patients. Specific medicines are prescribed and dispensed only after consultation, examination and investigations are carried out.
The medical profession and private health care facilities are already heavily regulated under the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998 (Act 586) — a specific law that governs health care practice in Malaysia.
All provisions controlling and regulating the private health care sector should come under one Act and especially so when an Act exists and is in force. All matters concerning the medical practice should come under the sole authority of its rightful ministry, which is the Ministry of Health.
The health minister has the authority to introduce new regulations under Section 107 of Act 586 if deemed necessary to implement any new policy to enhance patients’ rights.
Act 723 is entirely inappropriate and unsuitable for application in health care. Placing the health care sector under the ambit of this act for the purpose of governing medicine price transparency when a specific act already exists and can be utilised, is unreasonable and is an injustice to the professional services provided by the medical profession. The private health care sector is the only professional services sector where Act 723 is being used.
There must be engagement with stakeholders in decision making as the decision to use Act 723 on a professional service was done without engagement and came as a surprise to all.
Call for a Practical and Reasonable Approach
1) We urge the Ministry of Health (MOH) to halt and reconsider the use of Act 723 on health care facilities and ensure that all health care-related policies remain under Act 586 using existing provisions of the Act. If need be, new regulations can be made under the powers given to the minister under Section 107 of Act 586. Any regulatory change should be made through meaningful engagement with medical professionals, ensuring policies are aligned with the realities of private health care delivery.
2) The manner in which price transparency/price display is implemented must be reasonable and of benefit to patients and for the intended purpose. Asking for details beyond this scope is an overreach and putting unnecessary burden on doctors who face legal action if not complied with.
3) Any enforcement on the breach of any policy being planned must be reasonable, not a burden and threat to the operations of clinics which form the backbone of the primary health care sector in the country.
We call on the government to review this policy decision. Any policy should only be implemented after engagement with all stakeholders.
We the undersigned remain committed to working with the government to develop a balanced, practical, and patient-centric approach to medicine price transparency.
- Malaysian Medical Association (MMA)
- Medical Practitioners Coalition Association of Malaysia (MPCAM)
- Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia (AFPM)
- Federation of Private Medical Practitioners’ Associations, Malaysia (FPMPAM)
- Pertubuhan Doktor-Doktor Islam Malaysia (PERDIM)
- Malaysian Association of Advancement of Functional & Interdisciplinary Medicine (MAAFIM)
- Association of Private Practitioners Sabah (APPS)
- Society Of Private Medical Practitioners Sarawak (SPMPS)
- This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of CodeBlue.
