gerocultors can administer insulin and heparin, according to the interpretation of the National Court on its functions regulated in the V Framework Agreement of Care Services for dependent persons
The Judgment of the National Court of the Social Chamber, dated July 7, 2009, clarifies the criterion to which the last judgment of the Supreme Court dated December 2, 2008 and establishes that the Insulin or Heparin administration, subcutaneous route, must be attributed to gerocultors, in the absence of ATS, to establish the agreement and not contravene any rule.
Annex III of the V State Framework Agreement for dependent persons and development of the promotion of personal autonomy establishes in relation to the functions of gerocultors that:
“In the absence of ATS/DUE you can test glucose, use the subcutaneous route to administer insulin and heparin to users, provided that the dose and treatment follow -up is carried out by medical or nursing personnel.In general, all those activities that have not been specified before are entrusted to you, which are included in the exercise of your profession and technical preparation. ”
The Supreme Court Judgment dated December 2, 2008 established in relation to these cases that:
"... We are not faced with an assumption of supply of medicines or drugs, as a merely mechanical activity, in which the gerocultor will collaborate, but before a medical practice, which involves an invasive, although minimal actionof specialized knowledge, which do not correspond to the gerocultor, not even in the case that he was trained for it ... "
The audience judgment has returned to the reality of the situation, no medical training is required for the administration of insulin or heparin, the reality is that many patients self -medicate, since this only requires prior training.
We are not facing a change in criteria, since the Supreme Court's judgment was not based on the attribution of functions to the gerocultors without having the appropriate degree, but on the extensive interpretation of these functions by the Joint Commission without regulatory foundation that justified it.
With the publication of the V agreement the situation changes.Here are the negotiators of the agreement that have included in the functions of the gerocators the possibility, in the absence of ATS/DUE to do the glucose test, use the subcutaneous route ... Therefore, the judgment of the judgment of theSupreme Court, in which the decision was discussed by the Joint Commission without an article such as the one that now introduces the V Convention.
The hearing now establishes that although an invasive practice can be considered, subcutaneous injection does not entail risks, to the extent that it can be affirmed from any human activity, and any person can administer it, and with greater reason the gerocultors, who receive specific training inSubject of administration of medications, including insulin and heparin.
