“By the fourth day I was drinking out of the toilet”

Operation Maple interviews a mental health patient about her experience in prison. It is estimated that as many as 90 per cent of women inmates locked up in our corrections system suffer from some form of mental illness.

Will auditor’s report prompt Libs and PCs to reconsider health funding?

The Liberals and Tories may want to reconsider their health care funding election pledges following last month’s auditor’s report.

Trying to neutralize the health care issue in the upcoming fall election, PC leader Tim Hudak committed to an increase of $6 billion in new health care spending over the next four years. That works out to be about $1 billion less than the Liberal plan to reduce health care spending increases to 3.6 per cent per year.

At the end of June Ontario Auditor General James McCarter questioned the McGuinty government’s projections of health care costs over the next three years.

“Our view is that, given the health demands of a growing and aging population and an average growth rate in health expenses of 7.1 per cent per year over the past eight years, assuming that health-care costs will rise much more slowly in the next three years cannot be considered cautious.”

Looking at cost assumptions by sector, only the scenario for drugs looked reasonable due to “more definitive plans to contain drug program costs,” including expanded use of generic drugs and a cap on generic drug pricing.

Much of the government’s assumptions rely on zero increases in compensation costs to both unionized workers and doctors.

The OMA agreement is presently in its last year. The auditor writes: “That there will be no increase for health care professionals when the current OMA agreement comes up for renewal in April 2012 is clearly an aggressive rather than a cautious assumption.”

Expense estimates for hospitals assume savings of $1 billion between 2011/12 and 2013/14.

The auditor writes: “The government has indicated that it will be up to hospitals to operate within their funding allocation regardless of how they manage the savings and compensation pressures they face. Therefore, if hospitals do not find $1 billion in savings and do not succeed in freezing compensation, they will likely run deficits or may have little alternative but to cut services.”

While the auditor acknowledges that funding of services provided Community Care Access Centers are far more at the discretion of government, the three year forecast calls for increases of only 2.3 per cent – about a third of the present growth rate of 7.2 per cent per year.

Similarly, it plans to reduce funding increases to long term care from 8.6 per cent per year to 4.2 per cent per year.

The auditor noted the obvious: given home care and long term care are integral to moving alternate level of care patients out of the hospitals, it is hard to see how the hospitals can save money through these transfers if the recipient sectors are being starved of cash.

As damning as the auditor’s pre-election review is towards the Liberal cost projections, consider the fact that the Tories plan to spend even less. To date, the NDP has not released any specific financial commitment towards health care increases.

Inheriting a surprise deficit from the Tories in 2004, the McGuinty government introduced the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act requiring the auditor to review and report on the reasonableness of the government’s pre-election report on the province’s finances.

While the past increases may appear daunting, keep in mind that these increases are not inflation adjusted and do not take into consideration levels of economic growth. While these increases in health care spending were taking place, the government managed to reduce its inherited $5.6 billion deficit and balance its budget by 2005-06. It was the global recession of 2008-09 that plunged the government back into deficit, not excessive health care costs.

Television ads remind Ontarians health care is more than docs and nurses

During the Federal election voters may have got the idea the entire health system was run by doctors and nurses.

Even the NDP, normally more attuned to health care issues, pounded the idea that they were the party that was going to put more doctors and nurses to work across Canada – and do it now.

What was missing from the debate was the fact that health care is provided by hundreds of professions that are essential to a modern health team. Some of these professions – such as speech language pathologists – are in very short supply. It takes on average a year to recruit a speech language pathologist in this province.

Out west they refer to this large group of workers as “health sciences professionals.” Out East they are called “allied health professionals.” Here we just like to call them “hospital professionals.”

About six months ago we became aware of a commercial being run in British Columbia that highlighted the role of these professionals in the modern health team. Produced by the Health Sciences Association of BC – one of our sister affiliates in the National Union – the funny commercial shows a scene in which a man lies unconscious on the floor of a restaurant. The woman beside him asks if there is a doctor in the house. The doctor soon asks if there is an x-ray technologist present? A moment later, looking at an x-ray, he asks if there is a respiratory therapist in the restaurant? As each profession shows up in their evening clothes, they have their equipment with them. The commercial concludes by reminding us that modern health care relies on modern solutions.

OPSEU’s Hospital Professionals Division contacted HSA-BC and arranged a co-sponsorship of the ad to bring it to television screens in Ontario.

The ad will be showing from July 20 to August 16 on CBC stations across Ontario as well as on CP24.

Drawing attention to these professions is more than a matter of recognition. As the Federal election shows, public policy is driven as much by perception as reality. While Ontario has developed a number of initiatives to support the nursing profession – including a target for full-time nursing and a nursing graduate initiative, there are no parallel initiatives for other health care professionals facing similar circumstances.

With an election on the horizon this October, it is important for OPSEU to put these professionals on the politician’s radar.

Polling has shown a greater recognition of these professionals both east and west. It’s clearly time to increase their profile in the center of Canada too.

* * *
Due to posting restrictions with the ACTRA contract, we are unable to show the OPSEU/HSA-BC version of the ad on-line. However, the original HSA-BC version of the ad is available to be viewed on YouTube. See below.

Savings that cost more

Pointing out potential savings in health care is always fraught with danger.

We’ve dramatically reduced hospital beds under the assumption that savings could be had by moving more services into the community.

Now we have overcrowded hospitals and a stubborn wait times problem that prompted a significant influx of cash from both the Federal and Provincial governments.

The Health Restructuring Commission realized that it would be better if the mentally ill were taken out of institutions and placed in community-based care. Now all our psychiatric hospitals are jammed, the justice system is seeing a significant impact in its courts and corrections, waits are embarrassingly long – especially for youth — and agencies are struggling to keep up.

Mike Harris cleaved lab services in two, giving community-based work to the private lab companies. Now the cost of sending tests to these private labs are much higher than if they had been performed in a hospital. Meanwhile hospital labs have been undermined by the withdrawal of funding that previously paid for such community-based work.

Rethermalized food was sold as a way to save money for hospitals. Now hospitals are moving away from it (with the exception of South Grey Bruce Health Centre) after realizing it negatively impacts the patient’s experience and does not contribute to wellness. Nor does it set a good example for how individuals should eat when they get out of hospital.

Seems every time a savings idea comes up, we end up either paying more in cash or the idea results in a decline in services.

The Mowat Centre’s Will Falk points out in today’s Toronto Star that much of the advantage new technology has brought to the system is not being realized because of out-of-date fee schedules between the doctors and the province.

There is no question that compensation for doctors is extremely uneven. Falk points out that cataract surgery that used to take an hour can now be done in 15 minutes, yet ophthalmologists receive the same amount to do so – about $420, or $28 a minute.

This has led to vast discrepancies in how doctors are compensated with ophthalmologists as the poster-children for this inequity.

In the last agreement with the Ontario Medical Association, there was a modest adjustment made. Under the agreement, overall, doctors will receive an increase of 4.25 per cent in 2011 – the last year of the agreement. Only half that amount will be distributed across the board. The other half will go to adjustments to doctors who have been undercompensated by the system – or what the contract describes as “relativity.” The agreement does nothing to address those who can earn in excess of a $1 million per year largely based on the advent of technology paid for by the public.

Falk suggests its time to check the bill, as we would in a restaurant. However, given the results of past governments who have elected to battle doctors, there may be more than a little reluctance to take this on.

What is more worrying is how much would be cut from hospitals, in the anticipation of savings coming, if such a revised agreement were possible.

After all, we do live in the province of cut first, ask questions later.

***

As an interesting footnote to this story, it was also reported this week that a new batch of patent expirations will lead to considerable savings on drug costs.

The Toronto Star reported August 3 that Ontario should save $2 billion over the next three years as 44 medications come off patent.

Drugs account for about 10 per cent of the province’s $47 billion public health care budget. This should also have a significant impact on private drug plans.

Seems the “sky is falling” scenario Don Drummond and others have been pounding is looking more and more ridiculous. As Dr. Michael Rachlis has pointed out, if the doomsayers couldn’t get their projections right for this year, how credible is their 20-year forecasts?

Departing Closson raises questions as OHA leader through fall election

Ontario Hospital President and CEO Tom Closson is stepping down from his post in January 2012. He is still planning to lead the OHA through the October provincial election and the immediate post-election period.

The election may be an interesting dynamic given Closson is on record as advocating for more money to be taken out of the system at a time when politicians of all stripes are advocating staying the course and maintaining modest funding increases.

Hospital CEOs must have been shaking their heads when their leader told the Empire Club last October “we have to find ways to take money out of the system, so I think we need the leadership from government.”

Closson praised former Premier Mike Harris and his restraint on the system, never taking into account its longer term effect on his own membership or its impact on present-day costs.

At a time when his hospitals were struggling to balance budgets and find ways to push more patients with higher levels of acuity out into community care, Closson instead spoke about eliminating waste.

The Empire Club speech was certain a surprise. Months earlier Closson told the provincial finance committee that progress on wait times and public confidence in the system would be eroded with less than a two per cent increase in funding.

Despite promising to open up hospitals to greater public scrutiny, Closson wrote bizarre and insulting letters to labour and community organizations who argued against Schedule 15 of Bill 173 — the so-called “hospital secrecy act.”

Closson fought publicly with the Ontario Medical Association in 2009 over Bill 179 which expands the scope of practice for pharmacists and nurse practitioners. Confrontational, Closson publicly derided the OMA’s “retrograde ‘policy’ paper” and accused them of protecting their own turf.

Arguing physician costs were higher in Ontario than any other province, Closson’s wrote “this disparity, coupled with OMA’s adamant defence of physicians’ status, has prompted reasonable people to question whether taxpayers are getting the system leadership they deserve from the OMA.” Ouch.

Closson was never shy about pressing the alarm bells on rising health care costs, nor was he shy about extolling the results of such increased expenditures, particularly around reduced wait times.

Under his watch targeted funding became a greater feature of hospital budgets while global funding was in decline. With Queen’s Park determining how the money would be spent, it left hospitals with fewer opportunities to make decisions locally.

While hospitals were forced to come and explain themselves before the LHINs, bringing in so-called “hospital improvement plans” that included major layoffs and cuts to services, Closson remained a staunch defender of the planning agencies and their role.

Closson was never shy about advocating that more of the work performed by hospitals be conducted elsewhere.

“The answer is in the community,” he has said, often repeating the story of his father who was unable to leave hospital for five months due to an inability to place him in community-based care.

Following the ombudsman’s damning June report, the McGuinty government promised to regulate private hospital transfer companies. Closson was warned about the dangers of this unregulated business in 2009 including unclean vehicles, poorly-trained staff and risk of infection — but was indifferent to concerns when confronted by investigative journalist Tina Pittaway.

He told Pittaway the hospitals were satisfied with the arrangement and that the OHA had bigger issues to deal with in the health system. This is despite the OHA calling for regulation back in 2004.

The OHA has been obsessed in recent years with the idea of moving so called “alternate level of care” patients out of hospitals. ALC patients are those who have completed their acute care treatment but are unfit to go home without ongoing care. Under pressure, several hospitals threatened these patients with steep daily fees if they did not take the first long term care bed available even if it meant travelling outside their home region. The threats backfired, resulting in the province having to step in to ban the practice.

Hospital crowding has likely been a determining factor in the latest crisis. C-Difficile has spread through about 10 per cent of Ontario hospitals contributing to at least 26 deaths.  At least two hospitals — the Etobicoke General site of the William Osler Hospital and the St. Mary’s Hospital in Kitchener — have also reported bed bug infestations.

Closson was appointed CEO and President of the OHA in 2008. An engineer with an MBA, he has served as CEO of the University Health Network, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and CEO of the Capital Health Region in Victoria, BC.

Closson obtained previous experience in health care consulting as an owner of Medicus Canada and as a Partner with KPMG.

Can Ontarian’s afford more PC long-term care?

The Progressive Conservatives (PC) under Tim Hudak say they will add an additional 5,000 long-term care beds on top of the 35,000 that are already coming on stream. There is no reason to suggest that Hudak will handle this any different than his predecessor Premier Mike Harris did.

Historically, the relationship between the Conservatives and the long-term care corporations has been very tight.

In 1998, when the government announced a $1 billion would be spent to create 20,000 new long-term care beds in Ontario, the PC’s received large campaign contributions from the top three private for-profit long term care corporations operating in Ontario: Extendicare, Liesureworld, and Central Park Lodges Real Estate Income Trust (CPL REIT)

In 2001 when the tenders were announced, two thirds of the new beds were awarded to for-profit operators. Extendicare, Leisureworld, and CPL REIT received 39.5 per cent of the contracts.

Upon the completion of construction, all the sites received the provincial per diem funding for all beds in operation just like the other facility operators but also continue to receive an additional subsidy of up to $10.35 per bed per day, payable for the next 20 years to offset the cost of borrowing and construction. That is $75,550.00 per bed over 20 years.

This was an unprecedented subsidy of the construction costs for the private sector. After 20 years the facility operators will own the new building with no further obligation to the taxpayers.

In 2001 the private for-profit nursing homes began to operate the majority of LTC home beds in Ontario.

In 2003, Chartwell Real Estate Income Trust (REIT) was formed by consolidating three other private long-term care home operations and according to its trust document was established for the purpose of investing in a portfolio of income-producing seniors facilities. It has grown into one of the largest private long-term care providers in Ontario.

According to information obtained by the Ontario Health Coalition in 2008 through a Freedom of Information request, the lowest level of care is provided in the for-profit nursing homes compared to the not-for profit and municipal facilities.

The latest available data shows Ontario pays 36 per cent more in accommodation rates for long-term care than other provinces.

Most of the large private for-profit operators are structured as a Real Estate Income Trust (REIT) so they don’t pay any corporate taxes.

There is a critical need for long term care beds in Ontario. To get the most efficiency for public funding,  Ontario needs to invest in not-for profit and public long term care beds.

High occupancy rates roll the dice on hospital-borne infections

Hospital C-Difficule-related deaths are making the news again in Ontario.

This time hospitals in Niagara and Guelph are reporting deaths related to clostridium difficile, a bacterial infection for which symptoms include diarrhea, fever, and abdominal pain. The OHA is reported to have said that 16 hospitals are now struggling with C-Difficile.

C-Difficile spores are very difficult to clean, and can remain viable outside the body for a very long time.

It’s stating the obvious that hospitals need to maintain rigorous infection control policies – something they appear to be learning following years of ill advised cuts to cleaning staff.

Many countries believe reducing hospital crowding can also reduce chances of infection. In the UK, for example, hospitals are supposed to maintain an average occupancy rate below 85 per cent. Several years ago it was considered a national scandal when it was reported numerous hospitals were operating above that threshold.

In Ontario we continue to roll the dice on the issue of hospital occupancy, maintaining an average rate of more than 97 per cent.

Not only does the evidence suggest that such crowding leads to the spread of hospital-borne infections like C-Difficile, but it also leaves the hospital few options when seasonal surges of demand take place.

The Ontario government is trying to clear out beds occupied by so-called “alternate level of care” patients. These are people who have completed their acute care treatment, but are physically not well enough to go home. Many are waiting for long term care beds, some are waiting for home care.

This may give hospitals some additional capacity and lower occupancy rates – provided the bean counters don’t see any capacity as potential waste and close more beds.

By taking the ALC patients out it may have another unintended consequence: when seasonal surges do take place, the hospital will have less flexibility to clear beds if they are completely occupied by patients who have to be there for treatment. That means more patients in the hallways where cleaning may not be as rigorous and infections more likely.

Hospital-borne infections just make matters worse on the patients, on over crowding, and on the budgets administrators have to work with.

You can’t run a hospital like a hotel. Penny pinching only leads to higher longer term costs, sometimes tragically in the form of lives taken.

Video: Hospital professionals target Ontario PC pledge to undermine job security

Hospital professionals represented by the Ontario Public Service Employees Union have targeted the Ontario PC pledge to undermine job security through competitions for jobs public sector workers already have.

OPSEU’s Hospital Professional Division has posted a YouTube video showing the Tory platform for what it is – a terrible step backwards in worker’s rights.

“Increasingly workers are finding out they are being left out of the economic recovery,” says OPSEU President Warren (Smokey) Thomas. “Instead of addressing the issue of low wages and insecure employment, it appears that PC leader Tim Hudak is threatening to make the situation much worse.”

Substituting modern health care professionals for displaced farm workers from the dirty thirties, the video reminds viewers of what can happen when government places the interests of Bay Street ahead of Main Street.

“I think most Ontarians oppose the idea of their government deliberately creating a low wage economy in this province,” says Thomas. “By attacking job security and wages in the public sector, they are attacking all workers who are struggling to maintain their standard of living.”

Adjusted for inflation, wages for the middle class have remained stagnant for close to 30 years while the top 20 per cent of Canadians have made considerable gains. Canada’s income gap between rich and poor is among the fastest growing in the developed world.

The video was shot in Port Perry in June.

To view the video, click on the window below.

NDP platform takes on dysfunctional home care system

Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath recently told the media she would not be revealing the NDP platform all at once, but the party web site does already contain a comprehensive platform.

The platform includes four major headings –  Making Life Affordable; Creating and Protecting Jobs; Building Healthcare That Works For You; and Living Within Our Means.

The NDP is the only party to commit to taking on the dysfunctional home care system which the most conservative estimates suggest 30 per cent of costs are tied up with administration surrounding the competitive bidding. The NDP would conduct a review of home care with the goal of bringing back a publicly-owned and accountable system. They would also target funding to increase the supply of home care by a million hours within four years.

The NDP see fixing home care as part of unlocking the puzzle of patients stuck in hospital waiting for community-based care. They also plan to add long term care (LTC) beds to eliminate the 2,650 Ontarians presently on the wait list. A recent OHA survey did suggest there were alternate level of care patients waiting for home care, although the majority – 61 per cent – were waiting for LTC. Patients in ALC beds were also waiting for rehab, complex continuing care, palliative care, convalescent care, assisted living/supportive housing as well as placement in mental health care.

The NDP would also add 50 round-the-clock health care clinics to alleviate emergency wait times. The goal would be to increase alternative options to cut hospital emergency department wait times in half.

The NDP commits to bringing more health services back under public OHIP coverage, including the elimination of ambulance fees.

The platform includes a hard cap on CEO salaries, limiting compensation to twice the Premier’s salary. They make the point that it would still compensate CEOs at seven times the level of a nurse. The NDP would also crack down on the use of outside consultants.

An NDP government would also forgive student debt to new doctors willing to locate in underserved areas with the goal of adding 200 doctors over four years to these communities.

The party would make drug costs a priority in any negotiations with the Federal government around a new health accord.

The NDP would open up hospitals to the scrutiny of the ombudsman – something Andre Marin has been asking for in his annual reports.

Like the Tories the NDP would scrap the Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs), however, unlike the Tories, they pledge to replace them with some undetermined form of local decision-making.

No platform would be complete without a promise around prevention, and the NDP do that with a pledge to make mandatory physical education in post-secondary schools, ban junk food advertising to children and force large chain restaurants to label calorie counts.

Good discharge laws badly practiced for long term care

The laws governing hospital discharge and admission into long term care (LTC) homes are good but they are badly practiced by hospitals, says Judith Wahl, the Executive Director and Senior Lawyer at the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly (ACE).

Speaking in Toronto June 20th at the High-Level Briefing and Summit on Retirement Homes and Alternate Level of Care (ALC), Wahl was critical of practices that violated existing legislation, calling them unethical.

Some hospital discharge policies include statements that if a person refuses to pick from their short list of nursing homes they must take the first available bed that becomes available or face punitive fees.

An elderly patient was threatened with $1,800-a-day fees from a Toronto area hospital, and a Windsor hospital threatened to charge $600 a day if a patient refused to take the first open bed in a nursing home.

Wahl says it is her opinion that this is illegal.

Hospitals are permitted to charge $53 a day. That rate is also subject to a rate reduction under the Health Insurance Act.

The Long Term Act, passed into legislation in 2010, now makes Community Care Access Centers directly responsible for placement of individuals into long term care, not the hospital.

The CCAC must determine eligibility, assist with the application, and confirms requirements for choice of LTC homes for that person.

The legislation also states that patients can choose up to five homes and is not required to go into a nursing home unless he or she consents. Consent must be informed and voluntary, with fair representation.

Wahl says the Public Hospitals Act (PHA) and Health Insurance Act (HIA) further ensure that on discharge, patients cannot be abandoned even if they have completed their acute care treatment.

For patients and their families that need long term care they must to be aware of their rights on discharge from hospitals.

The Long Term Care Homes Act ensures that patients have the right to choose his or her own care.