The Pension Appeal Board and insurance providers have welcomed new rules that force insurance company doctors to cut the jargon and give clearer reasons for their decisions.
The new law, which came into force in July, applies to the written opinions of medical staff that are used in insurance decisions. They can also determine whether or not an applicant qualifies for a disability pension.
The law also requires that insurers' doctors now include a special clause in their written statements which states that the opinion is given on the basis of their "expertise and conscience".
Insurance company doctors had been criticised in the past over cases where a disability pension case had been rejected, contrary to the opinion of the medical staff treating the applicant.
Fewer appeals
Finland's Pension Appeal Board (TELK), which heard more than 5,300 appeals on occupational pension matters last year, welcomed the change.
"This is a good reform, and it will certainly have an impact on the pension institutions when they draw up their justifications," TELK chair Petteri Immonen said.
According to TELK, the opinions of a patient's own doctors have only been available to the appeals board when specifically requested by the patient.
"It is precisely these medical reports which should give as much detail as possible of the findings of the medical examinations and preferably, if they are available over a longer period of time, of the progress of the disease. And, of course, the treatments and the effects of the treatments," Immonen said.
Story continues after photo.
Occupational pension insurer Varma also welcomed the new law, saying it hoped it would lead to fewer appeals against decisions.
"This has, in my view, clearly improved the readability and comprehensibility of the opinions. We will see over time how it will be reflected in fewer appeals against these rejection decisions than we have had previously," Varma's Chief Medical Officer Jan Schugk said.
The company said it had already implemented many of the changes prior to them becoming law. One move to improve clarity saw Varma medical staff refer to claimants by name in their written opinions, instead of by a third-person pronoun.
Law calls on insurers' conscience
Another new aspect of the law is the language it obliges insurance company doctors to use in their decisions.
Doctors must now conclude by affirming that the opinion given is made "on the basis of the information available to me, my expertise and my conscience".
Varma's Schugk said he had already used similar wording in his own decisions.
The new wording differs slightly from older phrasing used, amongst others, on social insurance institution Kela's Certifcate-A form used to apply for sickness benefits, which states that a decision is based on a doctor's "honour and conscience".
"Honour as a term is perhaps a little old-fashioned, and I would not be surprised if at some point it were to be dropped from the medical certificate insurance as well," Schugk said.
"However, it is essential for the content of the statement that it is based on the available information and the expertise of the doctor," he added.
