Better Treatment, Better Care (6)
percentage as long as we have a well-functioning universal system and
they'll want to be in the universal system for a chunk of their time we know
surgeons have some extra time we know there are surgeons in canada who can't
get operating time because of operating time limitations we know we have
unemployed orthopedic surgeons in canada graduating out of medical school
finishing their their their practical work they're ready to be surgeons they
can't get a placement in a hospital surgical test we have these additional
resources let's make better use of the resources that are already idle in
canada give patients a chance to access those resources in those physicians
additional time that's available and that physicians decide the right blend
there are constructs we can put in to limit how much time goes into each
system certainly a lot of countries have studied that but there's no reason to
say physicians have to be in or out and certainly the international experience
is that if you allow physicians to practice
you'll get some great benefit as a result well i'm trying to think of how
that would work in practice in canada so what i'm hearing you say is that you'd
have say orthopedic surgeon that's a good example they might have their own
surgical center their own private surgical center and they would do those
low acuity patients two or three days a week and then they'd have one day a week
whereas the more complicated patients that they do in the hospital and in both
they'd see publicly funded patients and in both they'd see private insured
patients and they would just move back and forth seamlessly between the do too
but able to do more surgeries in a given week
absolutely in fact to the canadian experience that surgeon may only have
one operating day a week in the public hospital so now they can operate every
thursday maybe thursday friday maybe they have 12 hours what do they do
outside of all those hours between their consults there may be more
time they can access there's also the labor leisure trade-off the surgeon may
be willing to do more surgical time than they currently do if that surgical time
was better funded which might be possible in the private sector
none of these are necessarily certain in terms of cost but what we do know is
that we have medical resources that are idle in canada surgical resources let's
put them to better use let's use the ors for longer hours even if that is
privately funded that doesn't change the number of public hours that are
available but it does change the number of patients that are being treated in
canada let me ask you the same question asked about sweden was there an aha
moment that we've got to do this thing differently or was there was there um
just an incremental change that happened over time because that notion of if you
you are high enough income you've got to pay for yourself
i i've i've advocated that in the past but i i wonder how it gained political
currency so that they were able to implement it can you shed some light on
that how do you make a big change like that i think as we look to australia and
we look around the developed world what we see is is progressive change uh
activity-based funding started to be experiments within the early 1980s we've
now come 30 years forward just about every developed nation has really moved
into activity-based funding in a meaningful way canada being one of a
very small subset of laggards i think what has happened in canada is we've
we've really embraced this false dichotomy this false economy has really
taken hold of the public and there's a belief that in canada
there's the canadian universal way which has its downsides it has its waiting
lists and its people suffering as a result but at least everyone's covered
or there's the american non-universal way where apparently and there's not
necessarily any truth to this but apparently people die in hospital
corridors and you have to swipe your credit card at the door of the ambulance
and people low income people die uninsured which is not true it's
actually not the lowest income it's it's the gap between not quite low enough
income to be covered by the public system but not quite
into the private scheme which is where a lot of the work has been done but this
misunderstood american system has been used
to scare canadians to embrace this government-managed system and certainly
there there have been political benefits to doing that there are some very
powerful voting blocks associated with the public system what we find around
the developed world those is countries are moving away from that model even the
uk years and years ago started moving away from the system that we embraced in
the 1960s they started moving towards activity-based funding to choice for
hospital care they've always had a private parallel healthcare system in
the united kingdom they just haven't necessarily had some of the other
constructs and so it's just a progressive change
over time as countries look to one another and say well hang on a second
that's really working over in sweden they've embraced activity-based funding
they're getting eleven percent more care for one percent less money if we look
problems to province the differential and cost efficiencies about 13
between activity-based funding and global budgets maybe this is something
we should do over here whereas in canada we seem to look over there go that's a
great idea let's do a little study over here but let's not be the american
system let's not change and that has really been to the
detriment of patients and taxpayers there's one last jurisdiction i want you
to get into and when we were talking about which ones we talked about we said
switzerland because i i liked the structure of switzerland and you
described it let's look at switzerland as a stretch goal because they do things
quite a bit differently than we do here but in some ways uh in an optimal way in
a lot of ways in an optimal way because it operates in my view a little bit more
like the traditional kind of insurances that we're used to for our homes or for
our cars and i think because it's a traditional insurance is structured that
way there must be some good reasons for it we haven't really talked much about
co-payments but perhaps we will when we when we understand a little bit more
about how sweden up our switzerland operates now i i do you've made the case
very well about activity-based funding being central i think you've made the
case very well as well about the need to have a mix of delivery models public
private non-profit and so we haven't talked as much about this
issue of co-payments why is it that putting some of your own skin in the
game some of your own money on the line what what does that prompt in changing
the way the system operates what happens what's the psychology there i i think it
really comes down to how encouraging patients to make a more
informed decision about when and where it's best to access the healthcare
system as a patient in canada in the canadian province i can go to the
emergency room i can go to my my general practitioner if i had a referral within
six months i could get out to my specialist to me as an individual
there's no cost difference between the three to the taxpayer there's a
meaningful difference between the three i even go to my pharmacist again another
meaningful difference but it doesn't matter where i go i pay
the same amount as a canadian i pay nothing the taxpayer covers the entire
bill for me when we go to a country like switzerland where we have a deductible
and that deductible is entirely funded by the patient up until a certain amount
is met after that there's a copay to a second amount now as an individual i'm
acutely aware of how much that emergency room might cost me relative to a general
practitioner i could go directly to the specialist if i'm absolutely convinced i
need to see my heart surgeon and i know he's more expensive than the gp but less
than the hospital i'm just going to go directly there but i'll be paying for it
so i can make that decision about whether it makes sense for me to go
direct go to my gp get the referral because it's my money now
and i'm spending it as an individual again trading off a dinner out a
starbucks versus healthcare never trading off shelter or food versus
health care that's where the protections have to be in place and when
catastrophic events occur again limiting the amount that is out of pocket because
that's where insurance comes into play but it's about encouraging people to
think about the varying costs of different areas of healthcare nurse
practitioners pharmacist practitioners who should i be seeing for my particular
healthcare condition switzerland is very interesting in that it actually allows
people to tailor their co-pay within the universal construct
if we think from the canadian perspective we are we are locked in this
old this old and now long left behind healthcare model where government is
monopolistic where government provides all the healthcare services we learn
okay base pretty much everyone in europe is has long ago abandoned or is moving
rapidly away from this sweden is maybe the first step we move into some private
provision of services not a lot we have activity-based funding we have some cost
sharing we have a parallel system australia is the next step we have a
little more cost sharing we have inducements to go in the private system
switzerland now it's private insurance within the universe so as a swiss
individual you go out into the marketplace and you purchase your
healthcare insurance policy from one of the universal insurers
universal insurers are not allowed to risk rate they can only rate based on
the area you live in and there are only three premium variations allowed within
an area and they must take all comers there is a standard program which has a
standard deductible and a standard copay after deductible but you can increase
that if you want and reduce your insurance premium if you're willing
individual to take on greater risk you can also go into managed care programs
which vary the deductible construct and limit your choice provider to bring your
premium down as an insured individual now you have
your private insurance you go to the health care provider either covered by
your insurance or provider of your choice depending on your policy you take
your standard rate card with you the provider gets paid the standard rate
card takes the standard amount for deductible and you can choose between
the private or the public hospital for profit of the non-profit it's entirely
up to you as an individual if you're not comfortable with the private for-profit
hospital not a problem go to the increase in the uncommon government
hospital but they're out there or go to the private hospital you get to select
and everyone in that system is very focused on the patient because the
money's always following the patient through the health care system and what
happens in a universal construct i'm an individual i can't afford my insurance
that's okay the government will provide me a transfer for the cost of my
insurance to go and seek it in the marketplace so even the low-income