Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hot on the Blog
Raffi Cavoukian
Tim Hudak

GET UPDATES FROM Tim Hudak
 

Part 4: How I Would Bring Healthcare Back to Life

Posted: 09/21/2012 1:10 pm

This is the fourth part in a three-part series on health care reform.

Ontario is moving far too slowly in adopting a patient-centred approach to funding health care -- a model that most developed countries have been using for years.

There are two principles behind patient-centred funding.

The first is making sure health care dollars follow patients as they travel through the health system. The second is making sure that health funding reflects a community's health-based needs.

Patient-centred funding doesn't mean less money for hospitals and hubs -- it simply means they'll get the right amount of money.

Here's just one example: historically, Ontario hospitals have received a lump sum of money for the entire year. This had the unfortunate and unintended consequence of turning patients into a drain on hospital budgets. Under this model, every time a patient walked into a hospital for care, the hospital had less money. The province also uses the same funding model for the Community Care Access Centres (CCACs).

When patients are viewed as a drain, the patient-centred approach takes a back seat. Funding needs to follow patients and not the other way around.

We're proposing to reverse this. Under the new system, hospitals would get money for every service they perform. This simple policy change turns patients into valued customers, not drains on hospital budgets. They would be treated like human beings, and get better customer service. It would create the potential for healthy competition between hospitals and independent health facilities, such as Kensington Eye Institute. It would also reduce variations in rates now being paid.

The health hubs I outlined in my previous post would also be funded on a patient-centred basis. Nearly all of the money they get from the province would be based on a hub's community health needs.

Hubs would have total control and responsibility for this funding. For example, a hub might choose to locate a nurse practitioner-led clinic adjacent to a hospital emergency room, so that people with less urgent problems can be seen quickly.

The key idea here is for hubs to have the capacity to pursue more locally-appropriate improvements, based on local conditions -- rather than feel they have to plead with higher authorities for permission, or for resources to pursue these improvements.

What's really exciting about this is that, over time, local initiatives would result in more innovations by frontline staff that can then be circulated throughout the system, to ensure a better use of resources. No matter where someone is in the province they can walk into any hospital for care. Some hubs will chose to offer a particular service regionally, provincially, or even nationally.

So where would all this leave the Ministry of Health?

Under our health hub plan, a smaller, streamlined ministry would shift to a position of strategic advisor with responsibility for provincial health system priorities, regulation, funding, and performance measurement through Health Quality Ontario. This is significant work, but we don't need hundreds of health bureaucrats to do it.

The Ministry would set the policy structure for the hubs, but they would allow these regional health organizations the freedom to design programming to meet patient needs. The Ministry would ensure accountability for quality, either directly or through Health Quality Ontario, and financially through audits.

The main challenge for the Ministry would be capacity planning, and determining the province's future health needs. The last such plan in Ontario was created in 1998.

Without a detailed assessment of our needs and how to meet them, the health care system is on a journey without a map. This broad guidance is the kind of role that is appropriate for government.

The Health Ministry would continue to play an important role in Ontario's revamped health system, but that role would be fact-based planning -- not bureaucratic micromanagement of the system.

This will be my last post on health care in this series tied to our new white paper. We want to make sure to get the health care foundation right and then we can deal with "wiring" of program delivery. We will address other aspects of health care improvement in the near future.

Let me close with some final thoughts on some of the issues I've tried to explore in previous posts.

Health care is the Ontario government's most costly service, and the one most vital to the welfare of all Ontarians.

The problems that patients have in accessing health care today are not due to lack of money in the system, or any shortcomings of our medical professionals or others on the front lines.
No, these problems stem from the way we've organized health care. The system is hard to understand, and the pieces don't interact well enough. For patients' sake, we simply have to do better.

With the bold new ideas we suggest in Patient-Centred Health Care www.ontariopc.com/paths-to-prosperity, we will succeed.

 
FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 17
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Maria Korovessis Sewell
To decimate is to reduce by one tenth.
12:18 AM on 09/23/2012
"This simple policy change turns patients into valued customers." Gotcha. Especially for all the private clinics on the "path to prosperity". Newsflash, Tim: health is not commodity.
02:46 PM on 09/21/2012
Vote PC!!!!
photo
Turdinthepunchbowl
I float, therefore I am
01:26 PM on 09/21/2012
More ideology based nonsense Tim. Most peer-reviewed and evidence-based data supports the conclusion that for-profit health care is less efficient, more costly, has highest administration costs and provides poorer health outcomes than our current not for-profit system. As for costs of wages for health professionals being the driver of increasing costs that is also false. Most of the increases beyond the rate of inflation are from the for-profit side of the system (especially pharmaceuticals) My MPP is a pharmacist and runs a pharmacy which is a for-profit organization; maybe you can speak to your own member of parliament and suggest he lower his costs if you're really concerned about exploding health care costs.

P.S: I will be waiting for your peer-reviewed evidenced based data to support your statements.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMsa022033

http://www.cmaj.ca/content/179/9/916.full.pdf+html
12:33 PM on 09/21/2012
Another Hudak ad on healthcare…… sigh

Perhaps before trying to suggest a solution, you wait for a major problem to occur.

I know the ON PC party is dying to start chopping away but your “article” is clear that you are attempting to sell a different system for healthcare using code phrases like “throwing money at health care”; “smarter about how we spend”; “restructuring health care”.

Here’s the reality of Ontario healthcare; it is working quite well. Ontario is near the bottom in healthcare spending with only Quebec & BC lower yet high in quality levels.

In looking at the following reports: http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-ext-portal/internet/EN/Theme/health+system+performance/cihi010646
https://secure.cihi.ca/estore/productFamily.htm?locale=en&pf=PFC1791
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/pubs/system-regime/2008-fed-comp-indicat/index-eng.php#t4

Ontario is doing quite well in its performance in healthcare. There are system improvements & changes that could be made to make the system more efficient.

So based on the evidence I have read along with my own personal healthcare experience there is no need for another “Tory healthcare experience” in Ontario.

What is obvious from your continued focus/message on this issue is that you are attempting to create an issue to help unseat the liberals but it should not happen based on healthcare.

It is obvious that a tory Gov’t would radically redefine healthcare in Ontario to the detriment of services using the deficit as the hammer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:03 AM on 09/25/2012
I supose the long wait times at hospitals are your idea of the health system working fine , eh?.
Sorry, but talk to anyone who has had any experience in waiting to be seen at a local emerg. room to be helped for many, many hours at a time how they feel about how great Ontario is doing.
I myself have not had a family doctor for over 15 years now and know from my own experience and that of others of the long waiting times involved in waiting to be seen
Ontario may be at the bottom of the spending list, but that is not something to be proud of when people are laying in hallways on gurneys and some are dieing there from lack of care.
Torys aren't trying to "create" an issue, it already exists.
So if that is fine with you, then keep your head down and ignore the reality of the situation
10:31 AM on 09/25/2012
Rather than base my view on anecdotal info & "taking to anyone", I have based it on studies; research; facts. While there are definitely improvements that can be made to the system, re-vamping it tory style to pay down a debt is not something I agree with. And yes, this is a manufactured issue by the tories bsed on assumptions, rumours & information from "talking to anyone". Another way to strip funding away from services in the name of "efficiencies". Talk about ignoring reality...