Parties promise more home care, but will that be what we get?

Ontario presently provides more than 29 million hours of home care per year. Another 20 million hours are paid for out of pocket or through private insurance.

The NDP are promising another million hours, the Liberals are offering three million.

According to the Ontario Home Care Association, while the hours of care are up, the number of patients served in 2009/10 was about 45,000 fewer than in 2005/06.

When the Liberals increased the cap on how many hours of care an individual could receive, they did not put sufficient resources into the system to deal with the actual draw on services. With more patients discharged in worse condition from hospitals, the “clients” home care agencies and CCACs see are also much more labour-intensive.

Further, as a percentage of overall health care spending, home care has been in a slow but steady decline. In 1999 it made up 5.47 per cent of public health care spending. By 2009/10 it took up 4.13 per cent.

This is at a time when hospitals have been pushed to clear their beds of so-called “alternate level of care” patients, putting more pressure on the CCACs and long term care homes.

It presently cost $1.9 billion to provide Ontarians with public home care visits.

Where will the money from these new commitments come from?

The auditor looked at the government spending projections prior to the beginning of the election and concluded that base home care increases would be two-thirds less than the existing pattern. That means their base assumptions for funding are far less that the status quo. So, would Ontario need to cut home care before it adds the million, or three million hours? This doesn’t make much sense.

This is what the Ontario auditor had to say: “We were advised that a key strategy for containing growth in hospital expenditures is increasing community home care support and long-term care availability to enable more acute or alternative levels of care for patients discharged from hospitals. Because this will increase demand and therefore expenses for both long term care homes and CCACs, which currently already have wait lists, we concluded that the government’s assumption that both programs will be able to significantly reduce their annual expenditure growth rate is optimistic rather than cautious.”

The NDP have stated that they would take on the competitive bidding system, which they assume would free up $25 million by 2013/14 and $100 million by 2015/16. They plan to begin by conducting a review of the present system with the goal of moving towards a more publicly-delivered home care.

The Ontario Home Care Association insists that administration only counts for 10 per cent of budgets, but that calculation leaves out the administrative work conducted by CCAC case managers. While not all of the case managers’ work is administrative, case managers account for 23 per cent of CCAC costs. The association’s calculation is likely to leave out the cost of preparing bids, evaluating bids, severing employees, hiring replacement workers, and other consequences tied to the present bidding process. The Ontario Health Coalition estimates the current system has led to administrative costs at least at the 30 per cent level.

The Tories are much vaguer about their home care projections, likely a result of having a platform with the highest level of spending restraint. According to the Toronto Star, they plan to spend $175 million more on home care. They are also promising 5,000 new long term care beds.

Deb Matthews confirmed for all-candidate debate

The televised Ontario election leader’s debate won’t be the only campaign focus tomorrow night.

Deb Matthews has confirmed she will attend the London North Centre all-candidates debate Sept 27 from 7 pm to 10 pm at the AB Lucas Secondary School, 656 Tennent Ave.

Also confirmed are Mary Lou Ambrogio, Freedom Party Candidate; Steve Holmes, NDP Candidate; and Kevin Labonte, Green Party Candidate.

Conservative Party Candidate Nancy Branscombe has not confirmed.

Candidates from the Liberal, NDP, Green and Freedom parties will be attending to speak about what improvements they can offer to our health care system. 

The debate is sponsored by the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Middlesex-Elgin; Ontario Nurses Association locals 36, 45 & 100;  and the London Health Coalition.

For more information: please call 416-441-2502 or email ohc@sympatico.ca

Peterborough Tory candidate makes up stat, says he’ll “right-size” Ministry of Health

What is Peterborough PC candidate Allan Wilson talking about?

In a Peterborough Examiner survey of local candidates, Wilson said he had been speaking to people working in the health care sector who have complained that the Ministry of Health has increased 80 per cent over the past few years with little results for patients.

Wilson says the PCs would subsequently get rid of the Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) and “right-size” the Ministry of Health.

In 2007 OPSEU represented more than 5,000 signed members who worked at the Ministry of Health. Today those numbers are about 2,500. That’s not an 80 per cent increase, that’s a 50 per cent cut.

The LHINs are far from ideal, but they do perform the task of local planning, including the gathering of performance data. They do fund small local projects and undertake consulting, even if they don’t always listen. And they do put providers on the carpet when they fail to bring their budget into balance. With the Ministry already cut in half, one wonders how an even further reduced administration would take on these tasks under the Tories?

NDP promise to re-open Niagara ERs, raising questions about the role of smaller hospitals

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath promised to re-open the closed emergency rooms in Fort Erie and Port Colborne should voters put her in the Premier’s chair.

The NDP told reporters it would cost $10 million to reopen the two Niagara region facilities.

Confidence in the Niagara Health System has been flagging in recent years, resulting in the August appointment of Dr. Kevin Smith as supervisor. Smith is CEO of nearby Hamilton St. Joseph’s Health System. This year 33 people died at the hospital from complications resulting from the C. difficile outbreak at the Niagara Health System.

The issue raises the larger matter of the role of smaller community-based hospitals. In recent years, communities have been fighting to maintain their hospital services amid plans to close local hospital services, including emergency rooms.

Petrolia and Wallaceburg have both headed off potential closures of their emergency rooms. During one local area consultation, residents in Wellington-Waterloo Local Health Integration Network were told that they may have to choose between the Mount Forest and Palmerston hospitals. Both remain intact — for now.

In St. Mary’s Ontario, the local hospital faced overnight closure of its ER, which would have effectively made it an urgent care centre. So far the ER remains open 24/7.

Other communities have not fared so well. Shelburne lost the last of its hospital services. Residents now have to travel south to Orangeville. Burk’s Falls also lost its bedded facility attached to Muskoka Algonquin Health Care. Fort Erie and Port Colborne both lost their ERs.

When OPSEU first met with Health Minister Deb Matthews, she was adamant that better quality care was dependent on Ontarians migrating to larger facilities where the volume of procedures were higher.

The Liberals themselves argued against this when in opposition, successfully challenging the Harris government’s plan to close the cardiac unit at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, forcing Ottawa-area children and parents to Toronto. At the time the Tories argued there was an insufficient volume of work on the unit to maintain clinical proficiency at the Children’s Hospital unit.

The province formed a panel in 2008 to look at the question of rural and northern health care.

The panel recognized that people in rural settings were more likely to live shorter lives, have poor to fair health, and much more likely to be overweight.

They found that hospitals tended to be default health care providers in the absence of other services.

The real battle over the future of Ontario hospitals is not as likely to be fought along Toronto’s University Avenue as it is in the dozens of rural and northern communities across the province.

Clearly these hospitals need to fit into a larger plan that will look at improving health outcomes in these communities, not just in sending the sick to the bigger cities to find treatment.

OHA clarify estimates from curbing CEO salaries

Recently a Canadian Press story claimed the NDP planned on saving $80 million by capping the salaries of hospital CEOs at $418,000.

Clearly CP got it wrong.

The math appeared to way off given there are only 152 hospital CEOs in Ontario. That means the average salary would have to be in excess of $944,000 each to produce a savings of that magnitude.

There are some big earners out there, such as Dr. Robert Bell, chief executive of the University Health Network, whose salary was $753,992 in 2010. But nearly a million bucks each? No way.

The Ontario Hospital Association was evidently miffed by the CP report and issued their own press release clarifying the situation.

According to the OHA, if implemented, the NDP policy would save approximately $3.7 million annually at the hospitals. After requesting a correction, subsequent versions of the CP story stated that the NDP “plans to find the money by capping the salaries of public sector executives – including hospital CEOs at $418,000” – which they say will free up about $20 million a year, or $80 million over four years.

According to the OHA, 33 of Ontario’s 152 hospital CEOs make more than the proposed cap (including benefits). Based on the 2010 Sunshine List, 77 of the 207,000 people employed in hospitals, including CEOs, senior management, physician employees and other clinical staff reported a remuneration level (including benefits) higher than the proposed NDP cap of $418,000.00 for CEOs.

Did McGuinty err in his mental heath campaign announcement?

Premier Dalton McGuinty might have found a better venue for his campaign mental health announcement today at the Centre for Mental Health and Addictions (CAMH).

CAMH has experienced significant layoffs over the past two years, yet McGuinty’s announcement really had more to do with support for mental health services delivered mostly elsewhere.

For the first time, however, we have a glimpse of how the Liberals plan to support mental health issues for adults.

After waiting three years for the comprehensive 10-year mental health plan, the McGuinty government instead gave us a three-year plan for child and adolescent mental health this spring. There is no question this is needed – three of four children with mental illness are going without treatment, and waits are frequently more than a year. But what about the adults?

At McGuinty’s announcement he said Ontario would commit $30 million more per year on adult mental health – but not until 2014. This surely must be a mistake on the Premier’s part.

If it’s true, this is insulting on two counts: the first forcing adults with mental illness to wait another three years before their issue can be addressed, the second being the pittance he is offering.

$30 million is a fraction of the cost of the bricks and mortar his government is putting into hard infrastructure at CAMH, North Bay, Windsor, Cambridge and other mental health facilities. If a concrete beam could provide mental health care, this might be a good plan.

This is $30 million on what by then will be a health budget of at least $53 billion (quite literally by Conservative standards). That’s .006 per cent.

Ontario lags far behind other provinces on mental health spending and it’s not even close to reaching the World Health Organization standard, which suggests eight per cent of health care spending should be committed to mental health. Ontario is a little over five per cent.

Ironically CAMH is part of the Ontario Mental Health and Addictions Alliance, which is calling for a comprehensive basket of services in every community, complaining of “wildly uneven” access.

The Alliance states: “In communities across the province, there are shortfalls in service across the many parts of the continuum including access to psychiatric assessments, hospital beds, residential addiction treatment and peer support, to name but a few.”

After a three-year plan that delivered little, the Alliance is calling for “a number of critical policy, planning, and funding capacities” at the provincial level to meet broader system reforms.

They say the needed reforms include clearly articulated goals and objectives, the capacity to plan and fund based on population need, and the ability to monitor and report on the functioning of the system. Wasn’t this all supposed to be in the 10-year plan?

The cost of inaction on this file is huge – the Alliance estimates the economic cost of mental health to be $39 billion annually in Ontario.

There is also a further question about support for mental health issues that fall outside the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. The PC campaign shows programs outside the health and education envelopes being frozen until at least 2017, which raises questions about where the money will come from to address the social determinants of health, including supportive housing. Clearly there is some silo thinking going on in the Tory camp.

Unless Dalton misfired, the Liberal commitment appears to be a smoke screen to a public that is unaware of the scale of this problem. The NDP tell us they still support the all-party plan, which is far from being implemented. To date they have not addressed the issue publicly. The Tories say people have been lost in the mental health system, but offer no remedies in Changebook.

A year ago the three parties were all fired up about addressing the injustices in mental health. A year later nobody appears to want to talk about it.

Royal Ottawa: Is the private operator trying to push costs onto the public payroll?

Approaching its five-year anniversary, a new wrinkle has developed between the private developer and the public tenant over the cost of dieticians at the Royal Ottawa Health Centre.

The hospital has twice tried to advertise a position that should, under its contract, belong to Carillion, the P3 operator.

The blurring between public and private has been a continual problem at the mental health hospital.

Now the private consortium is trying to offload one of its costs – for an administrative dietician – on to the hospital payroll. The question is, if Carillion is supposed to be providing this service, why is the hospital being asked to essentially pay twice for the same service?

Having originally listed the position as an administrative dietician, the hospital corrected the situation by re-advertising for a charge dietician — a position that works directly with patients to recommend appropriate diets. However, the job description is still mostly that of an administrative dietician, which is responsible for working with food services in preparing the diets.

It appears the hospital and Carillion have simply changed the title to duck responsibility for the costs.

The Royal Ottawa has had continual food services problems since moving into the privatized facility in 2006. Part of the problem has been the lack of appropriately credentialed staff in food services, which is the responsibility of Carillion.

It is not the first time there has been a dispute over costs at the hospital, managers claiming after the first year that the lack of access to the services contract means they are continually asked to pay for costs our of their clinical budgets.

The Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre opened October 27, 2006 claiming to be on time and on budget. However, staff quickly complained to the Ministry of Labour that they had been moved into the building prematurely and faced significant safety risks as construction continued around them.

After delays with the other P3 – Brampton’s William Osler Hospital – there was a significant push to validate the privatized option by showcasing the Royal Ottawa. There was also one other incentive to move in early – the private consortium would not be paid until the premises were occupied.

The ROMHC was originally designed to hold 284 beds at a cost of $95 million. It opened as a 188 bed hospital costing $146 million under the P3 arrangement.

In 2010 Carillion’s international operations posted almost $300 million Canadian in reported profit, an increase of 24 per cent over the previous year.

Musyj calls for hospital mergers despite lack of supporting evidence

Windsor Regional Hospital CEO David Musyj is suggesting the best way to bend the health care cost curve is to amalgamate his hospital with Windsor Hotel Dieu Hospital.

As usual, Musyj lacks any evidence to support his suggestion, made before an audience of Rotarians in that city.

He may instead want to look at the independent Canadian Health Services Research Foundation web site, which says there is no evidence that such mergers save money.

“While the intuitive appeal of ‘bigger is better’ in hospital mergers is powerful, it’s clear the empirical evidence is weak and the potential for negative outcomes significant,” the Research Foundation states.

The Foundation warns that mergers are particularly difficult on staff morale, which has a direct impact on the quality of patient care.

They also note that mergers can disrupt services and absorb more management attention during a transition period, also affecting patient care.

The Windsor Star notes that the merger may be a tough sell given the last such merger cost the region two hospital sites and beds.

When mergers do occur, senior management usually go cap in hand to their boards, asking for more compensation to deal with the greater responsibility they now face.

Other money saving ideas Musyj gave the Rotarians include cuts to outpatient services and charging patients a fee for emergency room visits – the latter a clear violation of the Canada Health Act.

Musyj said Ontario needed a Royal Commission to look at the way the province delivers health services.

He also defended the LHINs, suggesting moving administrative offices to London or Toronto would not be in the best interests of his community.

Health care and the other parties

Most Ontarians will likely focus on the four parties most likely to take up seats at Queen’s Park after October 6th. However, that doesn’t mean there aren’t other parties out there, several with anti-Medicare platforms.

The newly formed Socialist Party of Ontario has five candidates in the coming election, three from Toronto, one from Peterborough and another from Leeds-Grenville. The SPO — as they like to call themselves – believes in expanding health coverage to include drugs, dental care and eye care. They say they would do this through increased payroll taxes and general taxes. The SPO also would end public funding to private “boutique clinics,” increase investment in health care IT, stop using the public-private partnership model to build hospitals, increase the number of chronic care beds, offer free fertility treatments (and contraception) and study the causes of cancer. For their full platform, go to: http://tumblr.socialistpartyofontario.ca/

The Reform Party of Ontario believes the Local Health Integration Networks should be abolished and local health care be operated by the municipalities. Heavily anti-tax, the Reform party would get rid of both the HST and the Health Tax. They want to go even further in cutting corporate taxes than the Tories and Liberals, taking the rate down to 8 per cent. Their health care plan includes educating many more doctors and nurses to flood the labour market and reduce wages in the health care sector. They plan to open up more health care delivery to the private sector, particularly around diagnostics. They also have something called a “Health Freedom Voucher” which individuals could use for basic eye care and dental. Less you think they are anti-union, they promise to create a “dialogue with labour to reduce the cost of such labour.” The Reformers have eight candidates in the election, scattered around the province. Their web site can be found at http://www.reformontario.com

The Community Party of Ontario is running nine candidates, pledging to expand Medicare to cover drugs, vision care and dentistry. The core of their platform is about uniting the left to block the right. Their election web site is at http://www.ontariocpc.ca/

The Ontario Libertarian Party is running 50 candidates across the province. They are campaigning to reduce government involvement in people’s lives. They believe the only role for government is national defense, the police and courts. “Getting government entirely out of health care is the only way to provide the greatest access for the most people to the best available treatment at the lowest possible cost,” the Libertarians claim. They say there is no alternative but to increasingly privatize health care. They don’t believe government should even regulate health professions, but instead it should be left to the private sector. They would phase in the dismantling of medicare, making every individual pay for their own health care. To go to their web site, follow: http://www.libertarian.on.ca/

The People’s Political Party has four candidates, three running in Toronto ridings. They claim to be about “hunger, housing, health care, law and the justice system.” They believe health care is an essential service. The party’s web site is the “official web site of Kevin Clarke.” To read more, go to: http://www.peoplespoliticalparty.com/

The People’s First Republic Party of Ontario appears to be an anti-fluoride group, although their platform is far from clear. There are many U.S. articles on their web site, and a reference to the Tea Party coming to Canada. They have also posted an article about mammograms potentially leading to unnecessary mastectomies. Their web site is: http://www.pfrpo.ca/index.php

The Party for People with Special Needs is pretty much as advertised, although there is no specific health care platform. Its not clear how many candidates they are running. Their web site is at http://www.ppsn.on.ca/

The Paramount Party is running four candidates. They have no specific health care platform, although they say they would ensure that seniors lead a happy life. They appear preoccupied with driving, wanting lower insurance premiums, lower gas prices, and government involvement in a public-private partnership oil refinery. Their web site is at http://www.paramountparty.ca/

The Northern Ontario Heritage Party doesn’t have a health care platform. The party is about expanding seats in the north and relocating Ministries there. They also want a seat for First Nations People. It’s not clear how many candidates they are running. Web site: http://www.nohp.ca

The Freedom Party is another anti-Medicare group who want the choice to buy private insurance. They believe in life, liberty and property. They are running more than 50 candidates in the election. Their web site is http://www.freedomparty.on.ca/

The Family Coalition Party is a fiscally conservative party primarily running on an anti-choice platform for abortion. Most of their policies follow this thinking, including an Act to exempt health care workers from non-emergency procedures that are in conflict with their moral values. They want to eliminate the LHINs, increase home care, and shrink government. In their first election in 1987 they ran in more than 30 ridings. Their web site is at http://www.familycoalitionparty.com/

The Canadian Choice Party is the anti-party. They don’t have a platform beyond the belief that MPPs should represent their constituents. They are running three candidates. Their web site is at: http://www.canadianschoice.com

The Ontario Confederation of Regions Party (CoR) is the last of its kind in Canada. They believe in direct democracy — holding referendums in place of representative democracy. CoR calls for more hospitals, doctors and increased training opportunities for doctors.  They say hospitals and LHIN bureaucratic “ranks and file” (sic) have become “hubs of corruption,” which is a theme through much of their web site. Their web site is located at http://sites.google.com/site/ontariocorparty/home

Several parties are registered with elections Ontario but did not submit a web site address. They are the Party for Human Rights in Ontario, The Paupers Party, and The Only Party.

Do Ontarians want to choose from rated health care providers, or do they want uniform quality standards?

“[My wife] Debbie and I can visit a city and see how restaurants and hotels are rated, but there’s nothing like that for our healthcare system. If my mom gets her knees done, I want to make sure she knows she can get that done where she can get the best possible results and they treat the patient well throughout their entire experience.” – PC Leader Tim Hudak.

Where has Tim Hudak been? Ranking the performance of the health system has become a sizeable activity in this province. Much of it is as limited in value as the hotel and restaurant rankings he and his wife appreciate.

Not all of it is in the public sector. For example, many private-sector sites exist that ask users to do the rating. For example:  http://www.ratemds.com/ allows patients to trash or praise their doctor. Of course, none of this information is verified or subject to professional review. Want to find a quality nursing home? Similarily you can always try http://www.nursinghomeratings.ca/understand-the-nursing-home-system/ontario

Public bodies also provide information rating health care providers.

Wait times are kept on a central web site at http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/public/programs/waittimes/

Health Quality Ontario issues annual reports on the performance of the system at http://www.ohqc.ca/en/index.php

Each individual hospital posts a performance scorecard on-line, although many people may have problems understanding the methodology and terms on these sites.

And there is an Ontario Hospital Association site that allows you to compare your hospital’s performance against the average. See http://www.myhospitalcare.ca/Pages/homepage.aspx

Looking for a long term care home? The government maintains a site with inspection reports at http://publicreporting.ltchomes.net/en-ca/default.aspx

Like those hotel and restaurant ratings he and his wife enjoy accessing, all this health care data can be suspect, incomplete, and lacking timeliness. Is it really helpful to know what a specific hospital’s C-Difficile rate is if the data is eight months old?

Peterborough Regional Hospital recently posted a negative standardized hospital mortality ratio score (HSMR). The HSMR is a ratio of a hospital’s rate of unexpected deaths to a national average, adjusted for age, sex and diagnoses of patients. It appears Peterborough’s method of fixing the score is not to improve care at the hospital, but to change the way hospital deaths are recorded. Under such circumstances, what is the real value of such data?

Also, the more health care is pushed into the private sector –as is Hudak’s pledge – the more difficult this information is to obtain.  Corporations frequently claim information is proprietary if they don’t want to release it to the public.

Hudak recently complained that health professionals were spending too much time on paperwork. If he expects greater reporting, this would require more paperwork, not less.

In a recent Vector poll the public liked the ability to look up quality performance information, but overwhelmingly said that it was up to government to provide oversight and maintain quality standards.

Instead of picking and choosing based on dubious quality reports, shouldn’t the government’s objective be to provide consistent high-quality care regardless of where it is located?