New regulations for aesthetic interventions: ban on before and after photos and discounts

New regulations for aesthetic interventions: ban on before and after photos and discounts

Federal Court Hoff creates clarity: billing and advertising for aesthetic interventions

Berlin, August 12, 2024 - In recent years, increasing commercialization in the field of aesthetic interventions has been observed. Especially through social media, advertisements for minimally invasive interventions are increasing and younger target groups. This development carries different risks, since possible complications are often not adequately discussed. In addition, limited discounts and before and after images create the impression that the results are always realistic. Now the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has created clarity and pleads for the application of the existing market behavior rules in order to ensure legal certainty for the patients, reports Prof. Dr. Marcus Lehnhardt, President of the German Society for Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (DGPREC).

wrinkle injections: Before-after representations prohibited

According to a judgment of the Frankfurt Regional Court of August 3, 2021 (Az. 3 -06 O 16/21), it was made clear that before-in-depth representations for medically non-operational plastic surgery measures are not permitted. This also includes injections with, for example, hyaluronic acid. Prof. Lehnhardt explained that this was an operational-plastic-surgical intervention that must not be advertised in accordance with Section 11 (1) sentence 3 No. 1 of the Members' Advertising Act (HWG). He welcomed this interpretation of the court, since there are also risks during such treatments, such as a vascular closure that can lead to blindness. Prof. Lehnhardt also emphasized the need for a labeling obligation, since expectations can be fueled and images can often be processed.

GOÄ - discounts create irrational pressure

Prof. Lehnhardt reported a significant increase in time -limited discount offers that hinder careful consideration before an intervention. A judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of April 4, 2024 (Az. III ZR 38/23) has now been clarified that the fee schedule for doctors (GOÄ) is also used if the treatment contract is not concluded directly with the treating doctor, but with a clinic, an MVZ, one GmbH or another player. This clarification applies in particular to the area of ​​outpatient wrinkles. The GOÄ is used as soon as medical services are provided.

Problems remain

For alternative practitioners who can carry out injections via alternative practitioners law, the above -mentioned provision does not apply because they are not doctors. Prof. Lehnhardt pointed out that it was astonishing that alternative practitioners are still authorized to inject wrinkles with hyaluronic acid. The legal situation is not yet clear here. The remedial advertising network does not regulate who can exercise medicine. Nevertheless, the BGH confirmed the view of the Cologne Higher Regional Court that the ban not only encompasses the classic surgical intervention, but also skin anti -sprays. This decision of the court is based on the protective purpose of the standard and the HWG as well as the possible risks for consumers. Prof. Lehnhardt announced that after the parliamentary summer break, the legal situation in this area is changed. He also emphasized that alternative practitioners: despite the lack of sufficient anatomical knowledge and the lack of medication for any complications, no adequate treatment environment can offer.

Source: German Society for Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery e. V.