Filenews 16 December 2025 - by Marilena Panayi
Delay in the delivery of biopsy results, because the staff "is new and does not know", long waiting time for appointments with doctors or not arranging appointments because "doctors do not accept new patients". Delay in the approval of treatments, different opinions between those responsible for specialized services and miscommunication between doctors. The Patients' Rights Observatory of the Cyprus Federation of Patients' Associations (OSAK) received a total of 47 complaints last month. Among them are complaints that reveal mentalities or procedures that cause unimaginable suffering or even endanger the lives of patients.
Indicative is the case of a patient who reported a significant delay in updating the result of his biopsy. The sample, he said, was sent to the histopathology laboratory a few days after it was taken. Despite repeated efforts by both him and the attending physician, information about the result was delayed. The patient was informally informed that the result was ready and when he personally went to the laboratory, the results of the test were delivered, which stated that they had been completed several days before. When asked about the reason for the delay, he was given the explanation that "the staff is new and does not yet know the procedures well".
Inconvenience and delays, however, are reported by many patients who are called upon to overcome various obstacles trying to secure the services they need.
In one case, a patient contacted a nephrology center to make an appointment with a nephrologist and they informed him that there was no appointment immediately available and he would have to be put on a waiting list. A long time passed without any information and he contacted the center again and was told that none of the doctors accept new patients. The patient complained because he had been waiting for several months and no one from the Center contacted him to inform him about it.
However, a cancer patient was also in despair, who suffered in his attempt to secure a referral to see his oncologist. Specifically, he mentioned that he visits his oncologist twice a year to monitor his condition. The oncologist, however, informed him that in order to be able to visit him, he must secure a referral from his personal doctor.
The personal doctor, however, to whom the patient contacted, informed him that in order to issue the referral (long-term), the specialist doctor must submit a request. The patient turned again to the specialist doctor who, in turn, told him that he could not ask for referrals for all his patients, since if he did so he would have to hire additional secretarial staff. The patient found himself in a dead end after the attitude of his two doctors and turned to OSAK for help.
In another case, a woman described the suffering she experienced trying to arrange an appointment with a specialist doctor for her elderly mother who suffers from dementia. The personal doctor issued a referral, however, when they contacted the Health Center of her area, she was given a contact number with the Mental Health Services. From the hospital, she was informed that she should not have been referred to them. Outraged by the situation, she reacted strongly and a little later received a phone call to schedule an appointment. She expressed her dissatisfaction, pointing out that citizens should not reach a point of intense pressure or confrontation to be able to be served.
A third complaint concerned a patient who suffered in his attempt to secure the services of a dietitian. As he argued, appointments with dietitians in a hospital have a waiting time of more than 6 months and there is no alternative, as nutritional preparations administered through state pharmacies are prescribed only by OKYPY nutritionists.
Different opinions and rejection of requests
Some of the complaints submitted to the Patients' Rights Observatory last month concerned rejection or delay in approving requests from the Ministry of Health or the Health Insurance Organization, requests to send patients abroad or to grant specialized treatments.
One case involved the non-approval of financial assistance for the surgery of a child with a serious chronic condition. The letter sent to OSAK refers to a specific surgical method. The complaining citizens invoke the relevant European guidelines and ask for the revision of the initial negative response.
The second complaint concerned a patient with active metastatic cancer, who has been undergoing combination immunotherapy for the last two years. The treatment is administered in an oncology center, with the treating oncologist pointing out that its continuation is critical to control the disease and avoid recurrence. However, the administration of the drug has been stopped by the competent Authority, as there is no literature supporting the continuation of treatment beyond two years.
