Category Archives: Health System

New Act vague on executive compensation

Health Minister Deb Matthews has introduced a new bill on health quality that ties executive salaries to performance, establishes provider quality committees, and amends the province-wide Ontario Health Quality Council. The question is, will it make any difference?

Bill 46 – better known by its cheerful moniker, the “Excellent Care for All Act” was read into the legislature May 3rd.

While intended to show government resolve to curb excessive executive salaries within the health system, the legislation provides little detail that would lead anyone to believe that it will be anything but business as usual.

What the bill doesn’t do is prescribe how executive compensation will take place beyond requiring hospitals to base bonuses on targets set by yet-to-be-defined provider quality committees. If there is an executive presently not on a bonus system, a portion of their salary will now be deemed bonus.

The targets will be reviewed by the Local Health Integration Networks. However, the LHINs have no authority under the Act to alter these targets.

Given there is no detail in the Act on what these targets should be, it is not clear how they will differ from targets already set under the LHIN Accountability Agreements.

The Act also calls on health providers to put in place a patient relations process, reflective of its patient declaration of values. It also calls for patient surveys – a process that it already in place and is reflected on present hospital scorecards.

The Act also brings the Ontario Quality Health Council out of the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act (2004) and makes some changes mostly to scope of the Council, including a new duty to monitor and report on health human resources as well as access to publicly-funded health services.

Bill 46 allows for considerable alteration by regulation, including expanding the reach of the Act to other public health providers.

Ontario begins to phase out global funding for hospitals — moving to US system?

Concurrent to its Act to tie health care executive salaries to performance, the province also quietly announced it was beginning the process of replacing global budgets with a patient-based payment scheme.

While few details are available, the communiqué suggests the new system will be built upon the wait times strategy funding, which will allocate procedures based on a number of factors, including the ability to perform the service under a cost threshold.

The Ministry says it will first move larger hospitals to the new funding model beginning April 1st of next year.  

However, details have yet to be worked out. The Ministry promises to consult with hospitals, LHINs and other “relevant partners” in the detailed design of the payment system. Among issues the Minsitry says need to be resolved: how to recognize hospitals with unique roles, such as academic health sciences centres as well as those serving small and rural communities.

The Minister’s office had told OPSEU weeks ago that rural hospitals would be exempt from the competition model, although the new communiqué is more ambiguous, suggesting the model may be instead adjusted to take into account their specific needs.

It is not clear how the move to more patient-based funding will be balanced by the government’s other promise – to bring in a funding formula that would address inequities in the current system. With the move to more patient-based funding, it would appear that funding formula may have already been abandoned.

With more hospital funding being directed from Queen’s Park, it raises questions around the autonomy of hospital boards and LHINs to determine local service.

It also means hospitals may be more subject to fluctuations in their funding base, raising difficulties in long term planning. This could impact on the recruitment and retention of health care staff.

The statement suggests Canada would be joining countries like the United States, England and Western Europe by moving to such a system, claiming, among other things, that it will improve access and cost efficiency. Wait a minute, the United States?

Paying pharmacists for what they are trained to do

The role of pharmacists is changing in Ontario. Pharmacists are now an integral part of the health care team in hospitals as well as key players in the more recent Family Health Teams.

The province also operates a program called MedsWatch, which pays community pharmacists to spend half an hour reviewing medications with patients who are on three or more prescriptions. Recently Ontario increased the budget for the program by $100 million.

MedsWatch makes sense – paying pharmacists for the work they are trained to do, as opposed to the expectation that professional allowances paid out by the drug companies, coupled with dispensing fees, is going to adequately pay for this professional time.

York University’s Joel Lexchin (MD) is blunter in his analysis: “Part of the solution is to stop paying pharmacists for being storekeepers and start paying them for the knowledge they gained from going to university for four years,” he writes in The Bullet. “As provinces reform primary care they should be looking to move many pharmacists out of stores altogether and putting them down the hall from doctors. When doctors write a prescription people can easily go to a pharmacist who has the time to spend with them and the knowledge to properly advise them.”

On Tuesday Janet Cooper, a Senior Director with the Canadian Pharmacist Association, addressed the Canadian Health Professional Secretariat (NUPGE) on the changing roles of pharmacy professionals.

Representing a majority of members in the private sector, Cooper said that the new Ontario drug regulation was going too far, too fast. However, she did appear open to the idea that we need to find new models of compensation, acknowledging she wasn’t defending the status quo.

Given increases in dispensing fees is an odd way of decreasing the price of drugs – especially for those who are not on a drug plan and have to pay out of pocket – it makes sense for government to look at additional ways of providing the services of pharmacists in a much more direct way. It would also guarantee that the money would be directed towards these services, unlike the current model.

We also can’t forget that the price of generics, as high as it is, has been directed by government policy. Government places a cap on the cost of generics based on the price of the brand name counterparts. In 2006 it was 70 per cent. Now it wants to move that figure down to 25 per cent and expand it beyond the public drug plans.

The pharmacy owners are reimbursed by government at the list price of the medication, not the discounted price passed on by the generics through so-called professional allowances or kickbacks. These discounts can be as much as 20 per cent of the price of the drug. The argument they make is that without the professional allowances, pharmacies can’t cover costs. Given the long hours and the explosion of drug stores in the province, this is not a surprise.

While the pharmacists are making it a question of access, one has to question the logic of a system that promotes the existence of more drug stores in Ontario than there are Tim Horton’s across Canada. There is no question that the private sector has provided more access to pharmacists than to any other health care service. When the drug wars started, Shoppers Drug Mart said it was putting on hold plans for 40 more stores in Ontario. Do we really need to pay higher prices for that level of access?

Further, Janet Cooper says that despite 31,384 licensed pharmacists in Canada, we are experiencing shortages.

The outcome of the so-called “drug war” is important. Cooper presented a study that suggested 24 per cent of hospital admissions are drug-related. Seventy per cent of those are preventable. They include such issues as individuals who take the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or who were not monitored. It also includes individuals who didn’t take their prescribed drugs because they couldn’t afford them.

Joel Lexchin suggests that if government really wants to go where the savings are, they should take action on brand name pricing. The average cost of a generic prescription in 2008 was $26 versus $66.50 for a brand name drug. Of $20 billion in revenue drug manufacturers receive, 70 per cent goes to brand name drugs. In 2007/08 Lexchin says two brand name drugs accounted for 10 per cent of the total cost of Ontario’s drug plan.

Is the Ontario government willing to take on big pharma? That remains an open question.

To real Joel Lexchin’s full essay, go to: http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/342.php

Economist says contracting out health care costs more

Economist Dale Orr says policy makers need to look further before making decisions regarding health care.

Orr professes astonishment that there is no explanation for the wide variety in per capita health spending in Canada, of which Ontario finishes second last.

Orr says that Federal transfers play a big part in determining health spending, giving some provinces more of a cushion than others in making policy choices.

He also suggests that contracting out costs more – a lesson Ontario should closely examine given it has among the highest percentage of private delivery of public health care service.

Columnist Carol Goar looks at Orr’s analysis in today’s Toronto Star. To read the full story, go to:

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/796798–goar-an-economist-analyses-health-costs

New health care jobs mostly term or contract

The fastest growing jobs in the economic recovery are term or contract, not permanent, with health care among the sectors that are leading this change in employment status.

Armine Yalnizyan writes in “The Temporary Recovery” that “the current shift towards increasingly temporary and impermanent employment injects a new uncertainty into the macro-environment.” She warns that such instability may affect economic recovery: “Without lasting jobs at decent incomes, it won’t take much to topple the whole house of cards once more.”

To view her full article on the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives website, go to:

 http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/temporary-recovery

In Brief: Labour Council boycotts Shoppers, Rexall / HOOP chief calls for pension changes / More trouble for US hospitals

The London and District Labour Council unanimously decided to encourage its 30,000 members to boycott Shoppers Drug Mart and Rexall Pharmacies. The decision stems from an aggressive campaign by the two chains to derail a new bill that would dramatically lower generic drug prices. … John Crocker, President of the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOP) is calling upon government to change the pension rules to allow for large multi-employer defined benefit plans. “I worry that as a country we are undoing decades of success at rasing the standard of living for retired people,” he said April 14 before the Conference Board of Canada’s Pension Summit. Crocker called upon all governments to “get the rules right” and take leadership in forming new sectoral plans. If multi-employer defined benefit plans were formed to serve various sectors of the economy, “no longer would the full weight of funding be on one set of corporate shoulders,” he said. …Two more U.S. hospitals are in big financial trouble. Founded in 1849 to serve the poor, New York’s St. Vincent’s Hospital filed for bankruptcy protection on Wednesday. The hospital board had voted to halt inpatient services and transfer or close outpatient clinics eight days earlier. The hospital had weathered bankruptcy in 2005, but lost $80 million last year. Meanwhile, in Washington 184-bed United Medical Center was taken over by the District of Columbia after it defaulted on loans to the city. The city will operate the hospital until a new owner can be found.

New drug regulation may bring down the cost of employer benefit plans

Much attention has been focused on the war of words between Shoppers Drug Mart and the Ontario government over a new regulation that would amend the Transparent Drug System for Patients Act (DIDFA) and the Ontario Drug Benefit Act (ODBA). However, little attention has been paid to the impact on employer benefit plans.

The amendment would reduce the cost of generic drugs to 25 per cent of brand names. The regulation would also eliminate professional allowances given by the generic drug companies to the pharmacies, something the health minister has compared to a kickback.

These professional allowances would be accounted for in the price of these drugs, many much higher in cost in Ontario than in the United States.

When the Transparent Drug System for Patients Act (2006) was passed, it created substantial differences between the public Ontario Drug Plan (ODP) and the employer-based private sector plans.

With this amendment, regulated prices of generics will also be passed on to the private sector.

Aon consulting, in their newsletter “Ready,” says with patents of major brand name drugs like Lipitor expiring soon, “the cumulative savings for employers may be significant and employers have an opportunity to explore how best to capitalize on these savings within a broader approach to cost management through the adoption of strategic and fully integrated employee wellness management.”

Implementation of the regulation will be swift – many of the terms come into force beginning May 15 of this year, including elimination of professional allowances for ODP.

Dispensing fees would rise by about 20 cents per year over the next four years, depending on the class of pharmacy. By 2014 dispensing fees will range from $8.83 to $12.14.

The government is also sweetening the deal by providing an additional $100 million for the MedsCheck program, a program that pays for an annual 30 minute consultation between the pharmacist and any patient taking more than three prescription medications.

OPSEU has publicly supported the plans, alongside most other trade unions and the Ontario Federation of Labour.

The OFL is also calling upon Shoppers Drug Mart not to hold their patients to ransom amid the chain’s moves to shorten pharmacy hours in the Minister’s home riding of London North.

“If the attack by Shoppers Drug Mart continues we urge the government to follow Ireland’s example when it was embroiled in the same fight last year and contemplate establishing publicly run pharmacies,” says OFL President Sid Ryan.

The battle between big pharmacy and the Ontario government has pitted Health Minister Deb Matthews against her brother-in-law, former Premier David Peterson, who sits on the board of Shoppers Drug Mart.

Stakeholders have until 5 pm on May 8 to respond to the new regulation.

In Brief: Drop in donations linked to uncertainty over the future of Cambridge Memorial Hosital? / More

An editorial in the Kitchener-Waterloo Record suggests Cambridge Memorial Hospital may be experiencing a drop in capital donations from the public due to uncertainty over the hospital’s future. While the editorial acknowledges that donations are down across Canada, they aren’t for the other two nearby hospitals. The hospital has had to recently trim 35 beds to balance its budget, while the LHIN has given a reprieve on 10 rehab beds. The KW Record writes: “The Health Ministry has a responsibility to say whether it wants Cambridge Memorial to be a strong regional hospital or a more modest community hospital. Cambridge residents would certainly prefer the former, but the ministry, so far, seems more inclined to support the latter.” … Smoking bans work. A Canadian Medical Association Journal article claims that in Toronto there was a 39 per cent decrease in admissions for respiratory conditions and a 33 per cent decrease in admissions for cardiovascular issues since 1999, the year the city issued the first phase of its public smoking ban. The biggest decline followed the 2001 ban on smoking in restaurants. … The Victorian Order of Nurses (VON) is downsizing its corporate services based out of Peterborough. VON says no local services will be impacted, although the local intake and planning department will be consolidating to London, Ontario, eliminating 20 local jobs. … Running neck and neck with the Labour Party, the UK Tories are promising a “big society” rather than “big government.” The Brit Tories platform includes putting more money into health care “in real terms”, including to private clinics willing to perform services at National Health System (NHS) prices. Leader David Cameron said he would guarantee access to a local GP 12-hours a day, seven days a week. Unlike Ontario, which is attempting to freeze wages for two years, the UK Tories are proposing a one-year public sector wage freeze for 2011, exempting the lowest paid workers. … The U.S. is failing in its efforts to eliminate hospital-acquired infections. A Health and Human Services department to Congress called for “urgent attention” to the problem. Of five major types of serious hospital-related infections, rates of illnesses increased for three, one showed no progress, and one showed a decline. As many as 98,000 people a year die from medical errors and preventable infections in the U.S. The same report also found deep disparities in access to health care between those with and without insurance. Examples include 74 percent of women ages 40 to 64 who had insurance had received a mammogram in the previous two years, compared with 38 percent of those without insurance. Children were twice as likely to have had a dental exam in the past year if they were insured.

Hospital donations going to hefty salaries of fundraising execs

Already reeling from the salaries of top hospital executives, today the Globe and Mail published the salaries of charitable executives, including those working for major health care providers. These include several Toronto hospitals, the Red Cross, and the Heart and Stroke Foundation:

 $350,000 or more:

  • The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto
  • St. Michael’s Hospital Foundation, Toronto
  • Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation, Toronto

$300,000 to $350,000:

  • Mount Sinai Hospital Foundation, Toronto
  • Heart & Stroke Foundation of Ontario

$250,000 to $300,000:

  • Toronto General & Western Hospital Foundation (4 people)

$200,000 to $250,000:

  • Canadian Cancer Society, Ontario Division
  • Heart & Stroke Foundation of Canada
  • Canadian Red Cross

Across Canada, hospital donations dropped by12.9 per cent last year. Hospital fundraising is used for capital projects, including new buildings, renovations, and equipment.

User fees for Quebec health care?

Oppositions is expected to be fierce as the Province of Quebec is promoting the idea of user fees for public health care services as part of its spring budget.

The Quebec government is looking at a fee of $25 per visit, charged not up front at the doctor’s office, which would likely violate the Canada Health Act, but annually, as a “deductible” included in their income tax. 

Under the proposal, the fees would be capped so that total charges do not exceed 1 per cent of a family’s annual income. It was estimated under one proposal that a couple with two children making 10 medical visits a year would pay a maximum of $250 annually.

 The Quebec government also announced a new health tax to commence in June, 2010, that will be levied on individuals when they file their income taxes. The “health contribution” will cost adults $25 this year and eventually climb to $200 in 2012. Lower-income families will be exempt. When fully implemented, the new tax will generate $945-million a year.

 “There’s no doubt that user fees violate the spirit of the Canada Health Act, which is quite clear that user fees cannot be charged,” Dr. Irfan Dhalla, Co-Chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare told the Globe and Mail.

The Globe reports that a number of Quebec academics, unions and social activists will be challenging the plan.

 “The decision has been taken and we will proceed,” Premier Jean Charest told reporters. “We will first proceed with a debate on the methods and on the way we will do it.”