Why is the McGuinty government paying more for less when it comes to private labs?

The Ontario government is considering ending provincial health payments for Vitamin D tests, according to a front page Globe and Mail story on Thursday.

While delisting is not new for the McGuinty government, of particular interest was the reporting of the costs.

According to the Globe, the cost of these tests done in a private laboratory is $52 compared to $32 when conducted in a hospital.

Yet increasingly the government is forcing hospitals to abandon community-based testing and send more work to three major private-sector for-profit laboratories.

This has always been an irrational policy given the private sector laboratories have always cost more and in most cases, take longer to turnaround results. The loss of payment for community volumes also affected the ability of hospitals to keep their labs better equipped and staffed.

After the fight to keep community testing at Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare in 2007, the government commissioned a study by RPO Consultants into a ten-year “pilot” in which 12 small hospitals were paid a fixed amount to do testing ordered from doctors in their community.

The envelope funding to the hospitals was initially calculated on expected volumes funded on 85 per cent of what OHIP normally pays to the private labs.

For the first seven years of the project the government did not give the hospitals any increase in this funding envelope despite significant increases in the number of tests some hospitals were being asked to perform. Volumes had increased by as much as 144 per cent during this freeze. The private labs were under no similar constraint.

The result has been an increasing spread between costs of performing tests in the hospitals and the cost of sending them to the private sector.

RPO reported that by the time of the study, it cost an average of $22 per community patient visit when the tests were conducted by the small hospitals, $33 when sent to the private labs – a difference of 50 per cent.

RPO tried to play down the difference, suggesting the hospitals were subsidizing their lab overhead costs from their global budgets – something the Ministry denied to us.

All hospitals consulted by RPO submitted briefs which touted the benefits of keeping the testing in-house. Two of the original 12 hospitals involved dropped out due to an inability to maintain increased volumes with static funding.

By conducting all testing in the hospitals, it allowed doctors to find all lab information in one place and avoid duplication. While the province plans to integrate lab information as part of its e-health initiative, no such integration has yet to take place.

Hospital also indicated that the community volumes allowed them to purchase new equipment, provide a wider scope of testing, and allow more hours of coverage.

In the end, RPO recommended the community volumes be given to the private sector, giving the flimsly excuse that the model didn’t work well within the structure of the Local Health Integration Networks. Hospitals are within the scope of the LHINs, private labs are not.

The impacts are already being felt. Muskoka Algonquin, the first hospital from the pilot to lose its community volumes, is proposing to eliminate its night shift from the lab and require a reduced number of ER nurses to conduct limited point of care testing.

If the province was serious about saving costs in health care, it would look at RPO again and realize incredible efficiencies could be realized by using assets we already have in our communities – the hospitals.

Closson downplays funding freeze despite signals from the McGuinty government

Tom Closson, president of the Ontario Hospital Association, is downplaying the possibility of a funding freeze despite clear instructions to his membership to plan for one.

Closson said he was “optimistic” that hospitals will see a two per cent funding increase despite a $24.7 billion provincial deficit. He may be the only one.

The OHA President was critical at the lack of a decision by government, which usually gives hospitals an indication of funding months ahead of time.

“The longer they wait, the more difficult it is going to be for hospitals to balance their budgets next year. And the more costly,” Closson told Canadian Press recently.

CP reports more than a third of Ontario hospitals couldn’t balance their budgets last year, running a $154 cumulative shortfall. Even a two per cent funding increase – the best case scenario – would result in further cuts.

Meanwhile, stories of looming hospital cuts continued over the holiday season.

Ottawa-area hospital are facing at least $51.6 million in cuts to balance their budgets, and several are contemplating closing beds and laying off staff according to a December 15 Ottawa Citizen story. “We have some ideas of what to do,” said Michel Bilodeau, Chief Executive officer for the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario. “None of them is palatable in terms of service to the population.” University of Ottawa health economist Doug Angus said hospitals preparing for no increase in funding are being realistic. A two per cent increase would only make cuts “less severe,” according to the Citizen.

The Shelburne Hospital of Headwaters Health Care is facing a proposal that will close all 26 chronic care beds, leaving the facility with outpatient X-Ray Services and laundry operations according to the Orangeville Banner. “Nibbled to death by a duck, that’s the way I feel about Shelburne Hospital” a local Mayor told the HHCC President at a December 10 County Council meeting. The Mayor says services have been gradually stripped from the Shelburne Hospital for years.

York Central Hospital is cutting 18 beds despite its location in a high-growth region. The hospital is tackling a $12.5 million deficit. The bed cuts will impact as many as 22 jobs at the hospital. York Central faces an average of 3.8 per cent annual patient growth. The Central LHIN has suggested that in the face of a funding freeze, York may need to trim other services not funded directly by Queen’s Park. Dr. Larry Grossman, York Central Chief of Staff, summed up the impact for the media: “More people in the community, plus the rate of inflation and zero funding increase for 2010 … without change, it will be nearly impossible to cover population growth and a $12.5 million debt.”

Norfolk General Hospital in Simcoe closed six beds in October and is looking to close another nine in the spring to deal with a $400,000 shortfall. Last winter the hospital came up with a plan to avoid running a deficit, but fell behind because it was unable to close nine alternate level of care beds. “Demand for those beds was too high,” CEO Bill Lewis told the Simcoe Reformer.

The new Peterborough Regional Health Centre is bracing for cuts as a Peer Review begins to tackle a combined two-year shortfall of $38 million. “To predict the outcome of the review before the team has even been announced is premature and a disservice to the process,” Central East LHIN Chair Foster Loucks told the Peterborough Examiner. To date, the PRHC has only received $35.1 million of an estimated $72 million for its post-construction operating/growth plan.

Do something about it

OPSEU continues to maintain a web site where users can quickly customize a letter to their MPP and cc it to the Premier, the health minister, and the two opposition health critics. You don’t have to know who your MPP is – just enter your postal code and follow the instructions.

To access the site, go to www.avoidingzero.ca

US experts say Sharkey recommendations will not improve staffing at Ontario’s nursing homes

The Ontario government’s plan to increase staffing levels in the province’s long term care homes cannot achieve its goal says two U.S. experts in an upcoming report commissioned by the Ontario Health Coalition.

The Ontario government reneged on its promise to bring in staffing standards after the last election, instead hiring Shirley Sharkey, a home care CEO, to make recommendations for the nursing home sector.

Sharkey’s May 2008 report, People Caring for People: Impacting the Quality of Life and Care of Residents of Long-Term Care Homes, suggests increased funding and voluntary staffing standards to be established by each home.

Toby Edelman, a senior policy attorney with the Washington-based Center for Medicare Advocacy, and Charlene Harrington, professor emeritus of sociology and nursing at the University of California, will argue in their report that such voluntary reimbursement-based approaches have been tried in their country for more than 20 years without success.

The full report is expected to be publicly release soon.

In December OPSEU members joined the Ontario Health Coalition in meetings with members of the McGuinty cabinet, bringing with them advance copies of the report.

Despite a series of well-publicized incidents that had the public calling for tighter regulation of Ontario’s long term care homes, proposed regulatory change has mostly involved the loosening and removal of many such regulations.