The occupational therapists’ association on Tuesday called on the Health Insurance Organisation (HIO) and the health ministry to explain changes to plans for bringing occupational therapy into the general health scheme (Gesy).

The association said it had become aware of information suggesting that “parallel arrangements” and changes to key parts of the proposal had been made without prior notification.

It is seeking clarification on what information professionals are now being asked to consider and whether any new arrangements could affect the outcome of the consultation.

“Consultation cannot be conducted on moving ground,” association president Despina Kaimi said.

“When an institutional interlocutor is called upon to evaluate a proposal, its data cannot be changed without prior official notification,” she said.

The association said the integration of occupational therapy into Gesy had followed years of discussions involving two governments and successive political leaderships.

It said it submitted a detailed proposal to the HIO in March, accompanied by a technical memorandum and a technical and economic study.

Following a further request from the organisation, it said it prepared a counterproposal after committing significant scientific, financial and legal resources to reach a consensus.

The association said the HIO knew that its counterproposal was nearing completion when it became aware of new information concerning changes to the original proposal.

“On what exact data is the industry ultimately called upon to consult?” it asked.

Kaimi said the association had participated in the process “in good faith” and responded to requests from the organisation, while issues raised by the profession had been recognised as important during the discussions.

The association said the appearance of new elements at the final stage of the process had raised concerns over whether the consultation remained based on the same terms that had previously been discussed.

It also raised concerns over access to occupational therapy through Gesy, stressing that the principle of universal healthcare meant access should be based on documented therapeutic need and objective clinical criteria, rather than exceptions.

It further argued that the same rules should apply to all professionals legally practising the same regulated profession.

“We are not asking for preferential treatment. We are asking for equal rules for everyone,” it concluded.