Showing posts with label MCI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MCI. Show all posts

Saturday, February 8, 2020

tele consultation should be allowed in corona outbreak


Shri Narendra Modi ji
 Hon’ble  Prime Minister of India
 Dear sir

To prevent coronavirus spreading in India if it enters and gets established the only way is to prevent flu like illness by adopting to Universal precautions.

In India a doctor seeing patients have a large number pf them waiting outside his chamber and are likely to get cross infection of flu or corona like illness.

Therefore, teleconsultation in cases of respiratory tract infections should be permitted. 

It can be in the form of a video consultation so that the patient doctor relationship is established.

In cases of flu it is easy to diagnose patients who require admission as they will be breathless.  Breathlessness can easily be tackled on video consultation.
 with regards

Dr KK Aggarwal
Recipient of four National Awards (Padma Shri, Vishwa Hindi Samman, Dr B C Roy National Award and National Science Communication Award)
President Confederation of Medical Associations of Asia and Oceania
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Chairman HCFI Round Table on Health & wellness, Building Consensus
Past National President and Past Honorary Secretary General, Indian Medical Association



Saturday, January 25, 2020

1,700 doctors who did PG Diploma from IGNOU can’t practise cardiology as MCI refuses to recognise their degrees


Opinion
1,700 doctors who did PG Diploma from IGNOU can’t practise cardiology as MCI refuses to recognise their degrees

Dr KK Aggarwal
President CMAAO, HCFI and Past National President IMA

The two-year course was started in 2006 to train doctors as cardiologists in 70 hospitals across the country. Between 2006 and 2012, about 1,700 doctors opted for the course. The university, however, stopped fresh enrolment in 2013 after the Medical Council of India (MCI) refused to grant a license to students pursuing it.

A group of doctors who had earlier taken the course then approached the Delhi High Court. In September last year, the court asked the Union Health Ministry to take a view in the matter.

The MCI-Board of Governors too concluded that those doctors cannot be allowed to work as cardiologists.

Reason Given: Evaluation of the training programme was not done within one year of starting it as per the Indian Medical Act, 1956 rules.

My Comments

MCI Ethics Regulation: 1.4.2 Physicians shall display as suffix to their names only recognized medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas and memberships/honours which confer professional knowledge or recognizes any exemplary qualification/achievements.

Under clause 1.4.2 there should be no reason not to write about their diploma on their letterhead along with then name of IGNOU. It will still be IGNOU certified and not MCI certified.

The clause 1.4.2 does not stop people for doing non-MCI diploma or take certificates. It give options of both only recognized medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas. MCI itself has no Diploma or a certificate course in cardiology, so other certificate and diplomas courses will invariably be started by institutions.  The MCI clause 7,20 should not be read in isolation but read with 1.4.2

7.20 A Physician shall not claim to be specialist unless he has a special qualification in that branch.

Also, the reason given by MCI is technical and not on merit.



Monday, December 16, 2019

Cardio-pulmonary Resuscitation: Easing Death




The Indian Council of Medical Research will soon have guidelines for doctors on whether to perform cardio-pulmonary resuscitation on patients with low survival chances. But are they needed when the MCI and the apex court have already given extensive guidelines?

Whether to pull the plug or not on a terminally ill patient is often a vexed ethical question for both relatives and physicians. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) is soon set to finalise principles that will guide physicians on whether to perform cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and put the patient on a ventilator if he has an incurable disease where the survival chances are slim.

Currently, the law applicable in this regard is MCI ethics regulation 6.7 which deals with euthanasia. It says that practising euthanasia shall constitute unethical conduct. However, on specific occasions, the question of withdrawing supporting devices to sustain cardio-pulmonary function even after brain death shall be decided only by a team of doctors and not merely by the treating physician.

A team of doctors shall declare withdrawal of the support system and shall consist of the doctor in charge of the patient, the chief medical officer/medical officer in charge of the hospital and a doctor nominated by the in-charge of the hospital from the staff there or in accordance with the provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994.

In Common Cause versus Union of India, 2018, a Constitution bench of the Supreme Court led by then CJI Dipak Misra held that an advance medical directive (AMD) would serve as a good means to facilitate the fructification of the sacrosanct right to life with dignity. The said directive will dispel many doubts during the course of treatment of the patient. That apart, it will strengthen the mind of the treating doctors as they will be in a position to ensure that they are acting in a lawful manner. However, AMD cannot operate in abstraction. The judgment has enumerated various safeguards and procedures of AMD, including who can execute it and its contents. Some of the safeguards are:

·                     In the event the executor becomes terminally ill and is undergoing prolonged medical treatment with no hope of recovery and cure, the treating physician when made aware about AMD shall ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of it from a first class judicial magistrate before acting on the same
·                     Instructions in the document must be given due weight by the doctors. However, this should be given effect only after there is full satisfaction that the executor is terminally ill and undergoing prolonged treatment or is surviving on life support and that his illness is incurable or there is no hope of him getting cured.
·                     If the physician treating the patient (executor of the document) is satisfied that the instructions given in it need to be acted upon, he shall inform the executor or his guardian/close relative about the nature of illness, the availability of medical care and alternative forms of treatment and the consequences of remaining untreated. He must also ensure that he believes on reasonable grounds that the person in question understands the information provided, has thought about the options and come to a firm view that withdrawal or refusal of medical treatment is the best choice.
·                     The physician/hospital where the executor has been admitted for medical treatment shall then constitute a medical board consisting of the head of the treating department and at least three experts from the fields of general medicine, cardiology, neurology, nephrology, psychiatry or oncology with experience in critical care and with overall standing in the medical profession of at least 20 years. They, in turn, shall visit the patient in the presence of his guardian /close­relative and form an opinion whether to certify carrying out the instructions of withdrawal or refusal of further medical treatment. This decision shall be regarded as a preliminary one.

There is a distinction between the administration of lethal injection/certain medicines to cause painless death and non-administration of certain treatments which can prolong the life in cases where the process of dying is not reversible. The first is an overt act, whereas the second would be informed consent and authorised omission. An omission of such a nature will not invite any criminal liability if it is guided by certain safeguards. The concept is based on non-prolongation of life where there is no cure and where the patient under no circumstances would have liked to be in such a degrading state.

In Common Cause versus Union of India, the Constitution bench held that euthanasia is basically an intentional premature termination of another person’s life, either by direct intervention (active euthanasia) or by withholding life-prolonging measures and resources (passive euthanasia) on the express or implied request of that person or in the absence of it. Active euthanasia also includes physician-assisted suicide, where injection or drugs is supplied by the physician. But the act of administration is undertaken by the patient himself. Active euthanasia is not permissible in most countries.

Passive euthanasia occurs when medical practitioners do not provide life-sustaining treatment or the patient is removed from such treatment. This could include disconnecting life-support machines or feeding tubes or not carrying out life-saving operations or providing such drugs. In such cases, the omission by the medical practitioner is not treated as the cause of death; instead, the patient is understood to have died because of his underlying condition.

With such extensive guidelines, we as medical professionals fail to understand the need to frame more guidelines in this regard. We are now in a dilemma about whether to follow MCI’s guidelines or the Supreme Court’s legal guidelines.

The national consultation meeting on “Do Not Attempt Resuscitation” (DNAR) under the chairmanship of Prof Balram Bhargava, Director General, ICMR, and Secretary, Department of Health Research, is scheduled soon. Dr Bhargava reportedly said: “There are many terminally-ill patients who know they are not going to make it, their relatives also know that they are not going to make it. The DNAR is just a way for them to exercise the option of not being put on ventilator. Many other countries have DNAR guidelines.”

DNAR is different from physician-assisted dying where medication, a prescription, information or other interventions are given to the patient with the understanding that he intends to use them to commit suicide.
The World Medical Association (WMA) this month reaffirmed its long-standing policy of opposing euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. After an intensive process of consultation with physicians and non-physicians around the world, the WMA adopted a revised declaration on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. It stated: ‘The WMA reiterates its strong commitment to the principles of medical ethics and that utmost respect has to be maintained for human life. Therefore, the WMA is firmly opposed to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.”

It added: “No physician should be forced to participate in euthanasia or assisted suicide, nor should any physician be obliged to make referral decisions to this end.”

The declaration said: “Separately, the physician who respects the basic right of the patient to decline medical treatment does not act unethically in forgoing or withholding unwanted care, even if respecting such a wish results in the death of the patient.”

The revised declaration defines euthanasia as “a physician deliberately administering a lethal substance or carrying out an intervention to cause the death of a patient with decision-making capacity at the patient’s own voluntary request”. It says that physician-assisted suicide “refers to cases in which, at the voluntary request of a patient with decision-making capacity, a physician deliberately enables a patient to end his or her own life by prescribing or providing medical substances with the intent to bring about death”.

Dr KK Aggarwal
Padma Shri Awardee
President Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania (CMAAO)
Group Editor-in-Chief IJCP Publications
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Past National President IMA


Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Doctors to dispense generic drugs only



As per the minutes of the 56th Meeting of Drugs Consultative Committee held on 1st JUNE, 2019 at New Delhi, agenda 4, one the proposed amendments has been done in the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules 1945 and medical practitioners will not be able to dispense branded drugs to their patient. The amendment is to prevent misuse of the exemption, which allows them to be out of the schedule H, exemption from procuring a license to dispense the medicine.

“CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSAL FOR AMENDMENT OF THE EXEMPTIONS PROVIDED UNDER SCHEDULE K REGARDING SUPPLYING OF MEDICINES BY REGISTERED MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS TO THEIR PATIENTS

DCC was apprised that Registered Medical Practitioners (RMP) can supply different categories of medicines including vaccines to their patients as per the exemption provided with certain conditions under Schedule K of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945.

Currently, there is no specific category which can be supplied by RMP to their patients. It is proposed that the following additional conditions may be incorporated under the conditions of exemption to prevent the misuse of the exemption:

1. The Registered Medical Practitioner shall supply generic medicines only.
2. The Registered Medical Practitioners shall supply the ‘Physicians Samples’ at free of cost.

DCC deliberated the proposal and agreed to amend Schedule K of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 to specify the medicines to be supplied by RMP to their patients.”

Appropriate MCI provisions

3.7.1 A physician shall clearly display his fees and other charges on the board of his chamber and/or the hospitals he is visiting. Prescription should also make clear if the Physician himself dispensed any medicine.


6.5 Secret Remedies: The prescribing or dispensing by a physician of secret remedial agents of which he does not know the composition, or the manufacture or promotion of their use is unethical and as such prohibited. All the drugs prescribed by a physician should always carry a proprietary formula and clear name.

6.3 Running an open shop (Dispensing of Drugs and Appliances by Physicians): - A physician should not run an open shop for sale of medicine for dispensing prescriptions prescribed by doctors other than himself or for sale of medical or surgical appliances. It is not unethical for a physician to prescribe or supply drugs, remedies or appliances as long as there is no exploitation of the patient. Drugs prescribed by a physician or brought from the market for a patient should explicitly state the proprietary formulae as well as generic name of the drug.

Drugs and Cosmetic Rules Schedule K(5): Drugs supplied by a registered medical practitioner to his own patient or any drug specified in Schedule C supplied by a registered medical practitioner at the request of another such practitioner if it is specially prepared with reference to the condition and for the use of an individual patient provided the registered medical practitioner is not (a) keeping an open shop or (b) selling across the counter or (c) engaged in the importation, manufacture, distribution or sale of drugs in India to a degree which render him liable to the provisions of Chapter IV of the Act and the rules thereunder.

All the provisions of Chapter IV of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, subject to the following conditions:
5[(1)The drugs shall be purchased only from a dealer or a manufacturer licensed under these rules and records of such purchases showing the names and quantities of such drugs together with their batch numbers and the names and addresses of the manufacturers shall be maintained. Such records shall be open to inspection by an Inspector appointed under the Act, who may, if necessary, make enquiries about purchases of the drugs and may also take samples for test.

(2) In the case of medicine containing a substance specified in 1 [Schedule G, H or X] the following additional conditions shall be complied with]:

(a) the medicine shall be labelled with the name and address of the registered medical practitioner by whom it is supplied;

(b) if the medicine is for external application, it shall be labelled with the words  “For external use only” or if it is for internal use with the dose;

(c) the name of the medicine or ingredients of the preparation and the quantities thereof, the dose prescribed, the name of the patient and the date of supply and the name of the person who gave the prescription shall be entered at the time of supply in register to be maintained for the purpose;

(d) the entry in the register shall be given a number and that number shall be entered on the label of the container;

(e) the register and the prescription, if any, on which the medicines are issued shall be preserved for not less than two years from the date of the last entry in the register or the date of the prescription, as the case may be.

3[(3)The drug will be stored under proper storage conditions as directed on the label.

Dr KK Aggarwal
Padma Shri Awardee
President Elect Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania   (CMAAO)
Group Editor-in-Chief IJCP Publications
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Past National President IMA

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Prefixing “Dr”: Taking the Shine Away





With the pharmacy council allowing its degree holders to use the “Dr” prefix, practitioners of modern medicine are irked and patients are left confused as to whom to go to in an emergency   

By Dr KK Aggarwal

As per Medical Council of India (MCI) ethics regulation 2.1, every doctor has an obligation towards the sick: “Though a physician is not bound to treat each and every person asking his services, he should not only be ever ready to respond to the calls of the sick and the injured, but should be mindful of the high character of his mission… A physician advising a patient to seek service of another physician is acceptable, however, in case of emergency a physician must treat the patient. No physician shall arbitrarily refuse treatment to a patient…”

Regulation 2.4 says: “The patient must not be neglected: A physician is free to choose whom he will serve. He should, however, respond to any request for his assistance in an emergency….”

In an emergency situation, the only answer is a modern medicine doctor or one registered with the Medical Council of India.

But it is regulation 1.1.3 that is especially important and defines who is a physician: “No person other than a doctor having qualification recognised by Medical Council of India and registered with Medical Council of India/State Medical Council(s) is allowed to practice Modern system of Medicine or Surgery. A person obtaining qualification in any other system of Medicine is not allowed to practice Modern system of Medicine in any form.” So, in an emergency, the public must find a doctor with an MBBS degree and the accepted way of doing it is to search for a person who has prefixed Dr before his name.

MCI ethics regulation 1.4.2 also says: “Physicians shall display as suffix to their names only recognised medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas and memberships/honours which confer professional knowledge or recognises any exemplary qualification/achievements.” In the case of MBBS doctors, it will be modern medicine.

Article 18 of the Constitution talks about abolition of titles: “No title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State. No states can officially issue titles.” When I got the Padma Shri by the president in 2010, I was cited a Supreme Court ruling as part of the briefing: I cannot use Padma Shri Dr KK Aggarwal under Article 18. But I can use Padma Shri awardee Dr KK Aggarwal or recipient of Padma Shri Dr KK Aggarwal.

The prefix Dr used by modern medicine doctors is not given by the Medical Council of India, a medical college or a state university, but by society to differentiate us from others and identify us as modern medicine doctors. However, today, even a person who has completed doctoral research and is awarded a PhD, prefixes Dr to his name. Practitioners of AYUSH systems of medicine also prefix their names with Dr even though they have their own appropriate terms such as Vaidya (Ayurveda), Hakim (Unani), Naturopath (Naturopathy), Yogacharya (Yoga) and Homoeopath (Homeopathy). One must remember that in an emergency, these systems of medicine are not effective. That’s not all. Universities also felicitate eminent individuals for their contribution in many fields such as literature, science, sports, music, cinema, social service, etc, with doctorate degrees. These individuals also prefix Dr to their names.

Now there is talk of the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) authorising candidates receiving the Doctor of Pharmacy degree (Pharm D) from recognised universities to use the “Dr” prefix. This title reflects entitlement and identity and the Indian Medical Association (IMA) is against it being used by those trained in other streams of medicine as it confuses people during medical emergencies. In a letter issued to the director of Board of Examination and Evaluation of Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, the registrar-cum-secretary of the PCI, Archana Mudgal, has informed that the University should use the “Dr” prefix before the names of candidates while awarding them degrees. But as universities in Maharashtra were not issuing degrees with “Dr” prefix, members of the Doctor of Pharmacy Association of Maharashtra approached the PCI for clarification. The PCI then issued a circular stating that Pharm D candidates can use Dr before their names. Legally, this is only an executive order and not a legally sanctioned clause.

Physiotherapists have also been asking for Dr as a prefix. Tomorrow, even nurses will start writing Dr as a prefix. Of course, quacks are also prefixing Dr before their names. And surprisingly, even health products are using Dr liberally such as Dr Morpen, Dr Fixit, etc.

The use of Dr as a prefix is widespread, be it dentists, veterinary doctors, acupressure and acupuncture specialists or occupational experts. The easiest solution to distinguish these branches of medicine would be to have specific degrees such as XYZ, Doctor of Pharmacy.

When I was the National President of the IMA, this matter was discussed on many occasions. We were getting many complaints from the public of being misguided and exploited by untrained doctors during emergencies.

Different variations of Dr were being used—DR, DR., Doc, Doc., Doctor, Dr (Modern Medicine), Dr (Homeopathy), Dr (Ayurveda), Dr (Naturopathy), Dr (Dental), Dr (Veterinary), Dr (Yoga), etc. I personally started carrying a stethoscope around my neck as a symbol of modern medicine and being available in any emergency.

While one can stop pharmacists or physiotherapists from using Dr before their names, one will never be able to stop AYUSH doctors from doing the same. So the IMA copyrighted an emblem for modern medicine which is to be used by all its doctors to differentiate themselves from those in other fields.

The government must come out with a regulation so that ordinary people can differentiate between doctors of different systems of medicine. The confusion can cause fatal errors and delay in treatments. Will the government listen or should we again look to the judiciary to intervene and take a decision?


Dr KK Aggarwal
Padma Shri Awardee
President Elect Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania   (CMAAO)
Group Editor-in-Chief IJCP Publications
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Past National President IMA

Monday, April 15, 2019

Give Them a Chance


Following a petition in the Delhi High Court, the Medical Council of India has said that those with over 80 percent disability won’t be barred from postgraduate courses


The Medical Council of India (MCI) recently submitted to the Delhi High Court that discriminatory regulations for postgraduate (PG) medical education have been amended and people with over 80 percent disability will no longer be barred outright. They will now be considered on a case-by-case basis and evaluated for functional competency while using assistive devices.

This followed a petition by Anjani Bala, an MBBS doctor from Ranchi with polio, who was denied admission to a PG medical course after she was evaluated at Safdarjung Hospital in Delhi. She graduated from the Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences in Patna and secured rank 80,506 in the NEET PG, making her eligible for specialisation. She interned in all departments. She petitioned the Court, saying that when she had completed her MBBS and done internships and worked in every department, both clinical and non-clinical, why couldn’t she be allowed to do an MD? The exam for MD is on May 5 and the guidelines are yet to be finalised.

In response, the MCI submitted that the regulations had been amended. However, the amended regulations only solve the problems of those with locomotor disability of over 80 percent. For several other categories of disabilities, the problems still persist. For example, those who have had one hand amputated still can’t get admission.

Last year, the Supreme Court in the Muskan Sheikh case asked why the petitioner couldn’t become a doctor as only one hand was amputated. Thereafter, she was granted admission in the MBBS course. But the new regulations require an applicant to have both hands and defy the SC’s observations. Similarly, those with blood disorders such as haemophilia, thalassemia and sickle cell disease were also barred. Those with more than 80 percent of these diseases are not eligible for admission. But when persons with 80 percent locomotor disability— including those using wheelchairs—are not barred, why should persons with other disabilities be?

Disability is calculated by a board specified by the State (in this case, Safdarjung Hospital in Delhi) based on visual, locomotor, speech and mental impairment and multiple disabilities. Minimum impairment should be 40 percent and the disability certificate is valid for five years for temporary disability and lifelong for permanent disability.

With respect to specific learning disabilities, the MCI guidelines were discriminatory for both UG and PG admissions through NEET. This includes dyslexia, dysgraphia and dyscalculia. But now dysgraphia has been removed from the allowed categories. So why have the other two categories been allowed and not this?

As for international laws, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990, prohibits discrimination against qualified job applicants with disabilities. However, only a few disabled students enter the medical profession as they must be able to perform the essential functions of a doctor and each school determines for itself what these criteria are. The US has many practising disabled doctors. A study in the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation based on data from 1996 estimated that just 0.2 percent of medical school graduates have some type of disability. The number of disabled doctors has, of course, grown since the mid-1990s.


In a case in the US, a federal jury ruled in favour of a hearing-impaired former student of Creighton University School of Medicine on September 5, 2013, in Omaha, Nebraska. The verdict from the controversial lawsuit sets a precedent for the rights of disabled medical students and doctors to study and practise medicine in the US. Michael Argenyi was accepted to Creighton University School of Medicine in Omaha in 2008. He informed the school that his hearing was impaired and that he would need interpreters and special equipment to attend lectures and communicate with patients. Argenyi was diagnosed as legally deaf at eight months old, and had similar accommodation of his disability from grade school to his undergraduate years at Seattle University.

In 2009, after Creighton refused to provide Argenyi with “a real-time captioning system for lectures” and a “cued speech” interpreter during clinical training (he offered to pay for them), he left the school and sued it for discriminating against him because he was deaf. One of the reasons the medical school denied Argenyi’s request was because it felt patients “could be more hesitant to share information when someone else was present” and that doctors “needed to focus on the patient (not a third party) to rely on visual clues to make a proper diagnosis”. Argenyi’s attorney reportedly said that a judge will now decide whether Creighton will pay the student more than $1,10,000 as reimbursement for medical equipment he bought.

In India, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, along with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 (together, the “Disability Law”) has been enacted by the government. The Disability Law gives effect to the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It inter alia seeks to protect disabled persons from various forms of discrimination, increases measures for effective participation and inclusion in society and ensures equality of opportunity and adequate accessibility.

Prior to its enactment, the law governing the rights of the disabled was scattered across the Constitution and various other Acts. Although these laws aimed at safeguarding the rights of persons with disabilities, they did not specifically provide for equality of opportunity especially in matters relating to employment. The Disabilities Act, 2016, replaced the Disabilities Act, 1995. Under the 2016 Act, all establishments (including the private sector) should have an equal opportunity policy and employers should register the equal opportunity policy with the State Commissioner or Central Commissioner (as applicable).

Most MBBS and PG doctors with disabilities may still be able to contribute significantly in desk and diagnostic jobs and as writers, speakers, medical artists, creators, administrators, etc. So why restrict them?

MCI Ethics Regulations 2.1.2 says: “A medical practitioner having any incapacity detrimental to the patient or which can affect his performance vis-à-vis the patient is not permitted to practice his profession.” This should be interpreted with regulation 8.5 which says: “During the pendency of the complaint, the appropriate Council may restrain the physician from performing the procedure or practice which is under scrutiny.” So such a person should choose a field in which his disability will not harm the patient.

All said and done, a professionally competent doctor with some disabilities should be handled with concern as he can still be of use to society.

Reproduced from: India Legal, Published April 22, 2019: p.36-37.


Dr KK Aggarwal
Padma Shri Awardee
President Elect Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania   (CMAAO)
Group Editor-in-Chief IJCP Publications
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Past National President IMA

Monday, December 31, 2018

Revisiting 2018: A roundup of Top health stories in India




2018 has been an eventful year for the country, especially in the medical arena. A lot has happened and it has left all of us in anticipation of the coming year 2019.

MBBS curriculum revised after more than two decades … an ambitious target for complete elimination of TB from the country by 2025… legislations have been passed …. some only by the Lower House….some have been tabled in the Parliament and are yet to be discussed before they can be enacted … outbreaks….natural calamities….These were but few of the stories that made headlines this year.

India took a step closer to universal health coverage with the launch of Ayushman Bharat.

But, perhaps the most momentous of all events this year was the dissolution of autonomy of medical profession and replacement of the Medical Council of India (MCI) with a Board of Governors.

Let’s take a look at some of the top health stories in India in 2018. These have been listed in no specific order.

Medical Council of India dissolved and so was the autonomy of the medical profession

The Medical Council of India (MCI) was dissolved with immediate effect on Sept. 26, 2018 and superseded by a Board of Governors after the Govt. brought an Ordinance called the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 to set up a committee to run the MCI until Parliament passes the National Medical Commission (NMC).  A 7-member Board of Governors was announced with   Dr. VK Paul as its chairman.

New MBBS curriculum

The MBBS curriculum was revised. In November, the new undergraduate curriculum was finalized by the MCI BoG. It will be implemented in the 2019-20 academic session. The “Competency-based UG Curriculum for the Indian Medical Graduate” focuses on medical ethics, better doctor-patient relationship and outcome-based learning. Another new feature is the introduction of elective subjects. Now students can pick up subjects of choice and dedicated time has been allotted for self-directed learning and co-curricular activities. The new MBBS curriculum has a course called Attitude, Ethics and Communication (AETCOM) which will run across years. Students will be assessed for how they communicate with patients; how they counsel people for organ donations or other challenging procedures; how sensitively do they offer care and obtain consent. All these things will count along with competencies and skills.

National Medical Commission Bill 2017

The government is hoping to pass the National Medical Commission (NMC) Bill. The bill is currently pending in Parliament and will be first taken up in the Lok Sabha. The Bill seeks to replace the MCI with a National Medical Commission as a regulatory body for medical education and practice in the country. Among other provisions, the Bill establishes four autonomous Boards under the supervision of the NMC:  Under-Graduate Medical Education Board, Post-Graduate Medical Education Board, Medical Assessment and Rating Board and Ethics and Medical Registration Board.

The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Dec. 29, 2017; it was referred to a Standing Committee on January 4, 2018 on account of opposition from the Indian Medical Association (IMA) to certain provisions of the Bill. The Standing Committee submitted its report on March 20, 2018 following which the Union Cabinet approved certain official amendments to the NMC Bill. It is unlikely to get passed seeing the tough stand taken by the IMA.

Ayushman Bharat - Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana launched

Ayushman Bharat - Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana, the world’s largest government funded healthcare program was launched by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi at Ranchi, Jharkhand on Sept. 23, 2018. It provides a cover of up to Rs. 5 lakhs per family per year, at any government or empanelled private hospital, for secondary and tertiary care hospitalization. More than 10 crore vulnerable entitled families - approximately 50 crore beneficiaries - will benefit from the scheme. The amount of 5 lakh would cover all investigations, medicine, pre-hospitalization expenses etc. All pre-existing conditions are covered. There is no restriction on family size, age or gender.

India sets a target for complete elimination of TB by 2025 at the Delhi End TB Summit

“India is determined to address the challenge of TB in mission mode. I am confident that India can be free of TB by 2025. The global target for eliminating TB is 2030, but today I announce that the target for India to eliminate TB is 2025, five years before the global target,” said the Prime Minister Narendra Modi as he inaugurated the Delhi End TB Summit and launched the TB Free India Campaign on March 13, 2018.

The Delhi End TB Summit was jointly organized by the Government of India, Stop TB Partnership and WHO South East Asia Regional Office (SEARO).

Supreme Court’s allowed “Living Will” in a landmark decision

In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court of India allowed an individual to draft a living will specifying that they not be put on life support if they slip into an incurable coma.

The order was passed by a five judge Constitutional bench comprising Chief Justice of India, which said “Human beings have the right to die with dignity.” Though the judges gave four separate opinions, all of them were unanimous that a Living Will should be allowed, because an individual should not be allowed to continue suffering in a vegetative state when they don’t wish to continue living, and know full well that they will not revive. However, the Apex Court has set forth strict guidelines on how to execute the mandate of the living will.

Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2018 passed by the Lok Sabha

The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2018, which had been introduced in the Lok Sabha in 2016, was passed by the Lower House on Dec. 19, 2018. The Bill is to be debated in the Rajya Sabha and passed by the Upper House before it can be enacted.

The Bill prohibits commercial surrogacy, and allows altruistic surrogacy. Altruistic surrogacy does not involve any monetary compensation to the surrogate mother other than the medical expenses and insurance coverage during the pregnancy. The intending couple must be Indian citizens and married for at least five years with at least one of them being infertile.  The surrogate mother has to be a close relative who has been married and has had a child of her own. Only Indian citizens can avail surrogacy.

Undertaking or advertising commercial surrogacy, exploiting the surrogate mother and selling or importing human embryo or gametes for surrogacy have been considered offences under the Bill with a penalty of 10 years and a fine of up to 10 lakh rupees.

Consumer Protection Bill 2018 passed by the Lok Sabha

The Consumer Protection Bill 2018 was passed by the Lok Sabha on Dec. 20, 2018. The bill, among other things, proposes setting up of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and forums at the District, State and National levels to examine and decide on consumer complaints. Appeals from the District Commissions will be heard by the State Commission and from the State Commission by the National Commission. Appeals from the National Commission will be heard by the Supreme Court.

The Bill has also defined the pecuniary jurisdiction of the three disputes redressal agencies, which have been substantially increased from those provided in the present Consumer Protection Act 1986.

·                For District Forum, the jurisdiction has been increased to Rs one crore (from up to Rs 20 lakh at present).
·                For State commission, the jurisdiction has been increased to between Rs one crore and up to Rs 10 crore (from more than 20 lakh but not exceeding Rs one crore at present).
·                For National commission, the jurisdiction has been increased to above Rs 10 crore (from more than one crore at present).

Other amendments proposed are as follows:

·                District, state and national fora do not require judicial members.
·                Not only persons but associations and other bodies can complain to consumer fora
·                Consumer Mediation cells at district, state and national level.
·                District, state and national councils, which are advisory in nature
·                A Central consumer authority which has judicial powers, can conduct investigations, search and make judgements 

Cabinet approves Allied and Healthcare Professions Bill, 2018

In November, the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved the Allied and Healthcare Professions Bill, 2018 for regulation and standardization of education and services by allied and healthcare professionals. The Bill provides for setting up of an Allied and Healthcare Council of India and corresponding State Allied and Healthcare Councils which will play the role of a standard-setter and facilitator for professions of Allied and Healthcare.

The Bill will also have an overriding effect on any other existing law for any of the covered professions.


Nipah virus outbreak in Kerala

In May, an outbreak of the Nipah virus was reported from Kerala. It was localized in Kozhikode and Malappuram districts of Kerala and claimed 17 lives. The outbreak was officially declared over on June 10, 2018. This was the third outbreak reported in India.

An advisory released by the Health Ministry said that “the Nipah virus disease is not a major outbreak and is only a local occurrence”. The outbreak was traced to fruit bats. In July, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) confirmed fruit bats were the primary source of the virus.

Zika virus outbreak in Rajasthan

The third outbreak of Zika virus in less than two years was reported in India from Jaipur in Rajasthan. The first case was reported in the end of September. More than 130 cases were detected. For the first time, during this epidemic, scientists found mosquitoes that were infected with the virus, indicating that it was being transmitted locally. Sequencing of five  Zika virus strains collected during the Jaipur outbreak suggest that the known mutations linked to fetal microcephaly are not present in the current strain.

In January-February 2017, the first three cases of laboratory-confirmed Zika virus infection in India were detected in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. In the same year in July, transmission of Zika virus was also confirmed from Krishnagiri District in Tamil Nadu. The World Health Organization (WHO) puts India in category 2 in the classification of Zika’s prevalence, which indicates an ongoing transmission of the virus.

HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Act, 2017

The HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Act, 2017 was notified by the Government and came into force from Sept. 10, 2018. The Act aims to end the epidemic by 2030 and safeguard the rights of people living with or affected by HIV by addressing HIV-related discrimination through legal accountability and establishing mechanisms for complaint enquiry and grievance redressal.

The Act lists various grounds on which discrimination against HIV positive persons and those living with them is prohibited. These include the denial, termination, discontinuation or unfair treatment with regard to: (i) employment (ii) educational establishments (iii) health care services (iv) residing or renting property (v) standing for public or private office and (vi) provision of insurance (unless based on actuarial studies). The Act also prohibits the requirement for HIV testing as a pre-requisite for obtaining employment or accessing health care or education. 

ICMR has a new Director General

Professor Balram Bhargava, Professor of Cardiology at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi took charge as the new Director General of Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and Secretary of the Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

A new Director General of Health Services appointed

Dr S Venkatesh is the new Director General of Health Services (DGHS).

A new Drugs Controller General of India

Joint Drugs Controller Dr S Eswara Reddy was appointed as the new Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI).

New IMA National President

Dr Santanu Sen, also a Member of Parliament, took over as the National President; Dr RV Asokan was elected as the Secretary General.

India assumes office of CMAAO President-Elect

Dr KK Aggarwal took over as the President-elect of Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania (CMAAO).

Supreme Court bans sale of Bharat Stage IV vehicles from April 1, 2020

A three judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Madan B Lokur has said that no Bharat Stage IV vehicle shall be sold across the country with effect from April 1, 2020. The Bharat Stage VI (or BS-VI) emission norm would come into force from April 1, 2020 across the country. 

The BS IV norms have been enforced across the country since April 2017. In 2016, the Centre had announced that the country would skip the BS-V norms altogether and adopt BS-VI norms by 2020.The apex court was deciding whether grace period should be given to automobile manufacturers for the sale of BS-VI non-compliant vehicles after April 1, 2020.

MTNL Perfect Health Mela celebrated its silver jubilee

The MTNL Perfect Health Mela, the annual flagship event of the Heart Care Foundation of India, celebrated its silver jubilee with the theme “Affordable Healthcare”. A National Campaign on Hands-only CPR 10 in collaboration with Ministry of Youth Affairs, Govt. of India was launched on the inaugural day. “Evening Conclaves” thematic panel discussions with celebrity guests were the highlight of the Mela this year. Topics discussed at these Conclaves included antimicrobial resistance, indoor pollution, harm reduction, safe water and air, CSR, infertility and non-communicable diseases.

A one-of-its-kind Spiritual Inter-Faith Conference on air, sanitation and antimicrobial resistance was also organized by HCFI along with the World Fellowship of Religions, in which eminent dharma Gurus of all religions participated as speakers.

Kerala Floods

In August, Kerala suffered its worst flood in 100 years. All 14 districts of the state were placed on red alert. According to the Kerala government, one-sixth of the total population of Kerala had been directly affected by the floods and related incidents. The Government of India declared it a Level 3 Calamity, or “calamity of a severe nature”.

Viral load test for people living with HIV/AIDS 

The Viral Load testing for all People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV) was launched by the Health Minister in February as “a big step forward in treating and monitoring people living with HIV”. The initiative will provide free of cost viral load testing for 12 lakh PLHIV on treatment in the country at least once a year. It will optimize the utilization of 1st line regimens, thus preventing drug resistance. It will also help in strengthening ‘Mission Sampark’ in tracking LFU (Loss to Follow Up) PLHIV.

Govt. ban on manufacture of oxytocin formulations set aside by Delhi High Court

In May, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare restricted the manufacture of Oxytocin formulations for domestic use to public sector only. It also banned the import of Oxytocin and its formulations. This order was to come into effect from July 1, 2018.

As per the order, no private manufacturer would be allowed to manufacture the drug for domestic use. Only Karnataka Antibiotics & Pharmaceuticals Ltd (KAPL), a public sector company, would be manufacturing this drug for domestic use and will supply the drug to registered hospitals and clinics in public and private sector directly. Oxytocin in any form or name would not be allowed to be sold through retail Chemist.

But, on Dec. 14, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court set aside the Govt.’s decision to ban private firms from producing and selling oxytocin. The bench of Hon’ble Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Hon’ble Justice AK Chawla said that the government’s decision was arbitrary and unreasonable and that there was no scientific basis behind the Center’s decision restricting private companies from making or supplying the drug to prevent its alleged misuse in the dairy sector for increasing milk production.

Cabinet approves the Protection of Human Rights (Amendments) Bill, 2018

The Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved the Protection of Human Rights (Amendments) Bill, 2018 for better protection and promotion of human rights in the country.

National Viral Hepatitis Control Program launched

The National Viral Hepatitis Control Program was launched by the Health Minister on World Hepatitis Day (July 28) with the goal of ending viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030 in the country.

India retains the WHO South-East Asia Regional Director position

India retained the top WHO position in South-East Asia Region Office (SEARO) with Dr Poonam Khetrapal Singh unanimously re-elected as Regional Director WHO South-East Asia for another five-year term beginning February 2019. She is the first woman to have been elected to the position of Regional Director for WHO South-East Asia Region after an illustrious career in the Indian civil service, World Bank and WHO.

Last year Soumya Swaminathan an Indian Paediatrician and Clinical Scientist known for her work in Tuberculosis on 3 October 2017 was appointed as the Deputy Director General of Programmes at the World Health Organization.

ENDS Controversy

In August, the Ministry of Health released an advisory on Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) including e-cigarettes, Heat-Not-Burn devices, Vape, e-Sheesha, e-Nicotine Flavored Hookah, and the like products asking states not to allow its sale or distribution. 

But on 28th December Public Health England (PHE) released a new film showing the devastating harms that come from smoking, and how this can be avoided by switching to an e-cigarette or using another type of quit aid.

The film has been released as part of PHE’s Health Harms campaign, which encourages smokers to attempt to quit this January, by demonstrating the personal harm to health from every single cigarette. The film features smoking expert Dr Lion Shahab and Dr Rosemary Leonard, visually demonstrating the high levels of cancer-causing chemicals and tar inhaled by an average smoker over a month, compared to not smoking or using an e-cigarette.Research estimates that while not risk-free, vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking.

Dr Lion Shahab, leading smoking cessation academic from University College London, said: “The false belief that vaping is as harmful as smoking could be preventing thousands of smokers from switching to e-cigarettes to help them quit. Research we and others have conducted shows that vaping is much less harmful than smoking and that using e-cigarettes on a long-term basis is relatively safe, similar to using licensed nicotine products, like nicotine patches or gum. Using e-cigarettes or nicotine replacement such as patches or gum will boost your chances of quitting successfully.”

Govt. bans use of antibody test kits to diagnose malaria

The Health Ministry prohibited the manufacture for sale, sale and distribution of the test kits used in Antibody Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Tests for routine diagnosis of malaria after it was found that the test was triggering false alarms. As per the notification, although the test is economical, the false positive rates in endemic areas were high. People with fever who tested positive in the rapid antibody test, were later tested negative in antigen test.

Plastic Waste Management (amendment) rules notified

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has notified the Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules 2018. The amended Rules lay down that the phasing out of Multilayered Plastic (MLP) is now applicable to MLP, which are “non-recyclable, or non-energy recoverable, or with no alternate use.” 



Dr KK Aggarwal
Padma Shri Awardee
President Elect Confederation of Medical Associations in Asia and Oceania   (CMAAO)
Group Editor-in-Chief IJCP Publications
President Heart Care Foundation of India
Past National President IMA