What do users think about improvements in EPS intervened during the Petro Government

Since the beginning of Government of President Gustavo Petro, The intervention of four important EPSs has been ordered. To Asmet Salud, Savia Salud, Famisanar and more recently, Sanitas, all with millions of users.

These interventions, driven by factors such as non-compliance with technical reserves and debts with service providers, have left users wondering if they have really noticed any improvement in service delivery.

(See: Does Supersalud have the capacity to manage large EPS interventions?).

The EPS have argued for months that they are in a financial crisis due to the low Capitation Payment Unit (UPC) and to delays in payments of Maximum Budgets.

A report from the Comptroller's Office revealed that several EPS do not comply with the Technical Reserve Investment Regime, generating a significant lack of resources and a risk for the health system.

Of the 26 EPS analyzed, Only 5 comply with the provision and investment of their technical reserves, while 15 do not meet the liquidity or solvency indicators.

For this reason, administrative intervention has been managed to improve these negative indicators in the intervened EPS.

But how has the health service really improved for the users of these intervened EPS? This is the question that arises in the midst of these government actions.

(See: Sanitas and Nueva EPS are not the only ones: other EPS that are in similar situations).

Ultimately, users expect to see tangible improvements in the quality and accessibility of the medical care they receive, as well as in the management of appointments, the delivery of medications and other aspects relevant to their well-being.

The expectation is that the interventions will not only correct financial problems, but will also translate into a real improvement in the experience of users of the health system.

Amanda Rincón, Famisanar user and former president of the Users Association of that EPS, recognizes a “slight improvement” in the provision of the service, but points out that the problems and high rates of Requests, Complaints, Claims and Reports persist.

During a meeting in early March in which representatives of 27 other regional Famisanar user organizations and the current EPS auditor, Sandra Milena Jaramillo, participated, the goal of avoiding the liquidation of Famisanar was discussed.. However, according to Rincón, this objective has led to a change in the IPS that provide services to less expensive ones, but with a decrease in the quality of care.

For Juan Carlos Mejía, president of the Savia Salud Users Association, he recognizes that although the EPS has improved in some indicators, it has also worsened in other aspects.

Mejía highlights that, after the intervention, Savia Salud has improved in spending control by changing from private to public providers, but this has meant that many public IPS are not prepared to meet the needs of so many users, which has caused complaints and claims.

In summary, Users express concern about the apparent lack of significant improvements in the quality of care of the intervened EPSpointing out that these interventions seem to be more related to political games than to the real well-being of the members.

(See: Sanitas and Nueva EPS are not the only ones: other EPS that are in similar situations).

SOFÍA DÍAZ RICO
Journalist Portfolio