UK and Canada Prove That Government Medicine Kills

[Marilyn. 340]

the hospital food I have eaten in the US is pretty gross and tasteless too

the hospital food nessa had while she was in having the baby, nessa ranked it as very good.

yeah I am sure there are hospitals in both the US and Canada that have good food... I have had hospital stays in two different hospitals and both of them didn't have very good food...

[luckytxn 2,265]

BC Medical Association:

Waiting Too Long for Hip and Knee Surgery Costs

$10,000 Per Patient-Maximum Wait Times Should

Be No Longer Than 6 Months

by staff writer

June 28, 2006 CCN Matthews

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(CCNMatthews - June 28, 2006) - Two new reports released today provide evidence that waiting for health care has a quantifiable price tag and that wait time benchmarks must be set for all major diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical procedures.

The BCMA today released a policy paper "Waiting Too Long: Reducing and Better Managing Wait Times in BC" in which it calls for governments to establish wait time benchmarks for all major medical procedures and as an interim measure where no benchmark exists to ensure no one waits more than six months for care.

"There is collective agreement that wait time reduction is a priority. We believe there needs to be an immediate commitment to set and monitor a maximum wait time of six months for all medically required services," Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid, President of the BC Medical Association said.

The Association's report also calls for a 25 percent increase in operating room capacity in BC within two years and a further 25 percent increase in capacity by the close of the 2009/10 government fiscal year.

The BCMA recommends that routine hospital occupancy not exceed 85 percent to allow for patient flow fluctuations and the accommodation of patients coming into hospital through the emergency room.

The report also calls for the establishment of a BC Wait Times Commission to make recommendations regarding how to target health care funding to deal with wait time priorities. This new commission would be a collaborative effort between physicians, nurses, government, the health authorities and members of the public. They would oversee the spending of the $715 million that the Federal government has earmarked for wait list reduction in BC over the next 10 years.

The urgency to take these actions was reinforced with the simultaneous release of a report "The Economic Cost of Wait Times in Canada", commissioned by the BCMA and Canadian Medical Association. The study, completed by The Centre for Spatial Economics assesses the overall cost to the community of lengthy wait times. It provides data on the impact of wait times for BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario for four medically required procedures.

"When looking at the real impacts of what increased wait times in our health care system are we need to look at everything from lost wages to increased physician costs associated with extra office visits," said Ernie Stokes, Managing Director for The Centre for Spatial Economics.

The BCMA is hoping that the release of both papers today will provide information that creates a greater sense of urgency for governments to address the wait time issue.

The BCMA represents the interests of all physicians across the province and is an advocate for excellence in patient care with the provincial and federal governments. The Association supports initiatives related to health promotion, physician relations with the community, developing health care policy, and negotiating compensation for physicians with the provincial government. More information on the BCMA can be found at bcma.org.

Media Backgrounder - Waiting Too Long

Wait lists continue to be one of the most significant problems facing patients in BC's health care system. Governments have only recently begun addressing the issue. As part of the 2004 First Ministers Ten Year Health Plan, BC will receive approximately $715M in wait reduction funding. Some of this funding has already been provided to health authorities across the province to increase the number of surgeries, especially joint replacement, and to UBC for the creation of its Centre for Surgical Innovation which supports dedicated operating rooms to help clear patient backlogs for hip and knee surgeries.

In August 2005, the Wait Time Alliance, an association of the Canadian Medical Association and six national medical specialty societies, released wait-time benchmarks across six specialties. They include:

- Hip and knee replacement within 6 months of consultation with a specialist for scheduled cases, and within 30 or 90 days for urgent cases, depending on severity;

- CT and MRI scans within 30 days for scheduled cases, and within 7 days for urgent cases;

- Cataract surgery within 4 months of consultation with a specialist;

- Cardiac bypass surgery within 6 weeks for scheduled cases, and within 7 days for urgent cases

The BCMA recommends that, no later than December 2007, there should be specific benchmarks for all major diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical services, and patients should wait a maximum of 6 months from the time of GP referral to the provision of any medically required service.

The management and reduction of wait lists must not be focused on just the five priority areas. Waits for all procedures are equally important - especially to the patients who are waiting.

Although new funding and the introduction of benchmarks are welcome, changes in the ways wait lists are managed must also take place. The release of the BCMA's report, Waiting Too Long: Reducing and Better Managing Wait times in BC, addresses this issue and outlines specific recommendations to improve upon current practices.

- Establishing routine hospital occupancy that does not exceed 85 percent to allow for patient flow fluctuations and the accommodation of patients admitted through the emergency room

- Operating room capacity should increase by 25% by 2008;

- Additional expansion of OR capacity of 25% by 2009/2010;

- The physician and nursing shortage needs to be aggressively addressed;

- Prioritize Emergency Room waits through the Provincial Emergency Room Task Force to deal with short-term issues as well as look at long term issues;

- Create an accountable BC Wait Times Commission including government, physicians, nurses, and health authorities to make decisions on how targeted wait time funding will be allocated.

Not only are too many patients still waiting for their procedures, but a new report called, The Economic Cost of Wait Times in Canada, shows that patients who wait too long for care cost society upwards of $10,000 per patient in terms of lost wages and reduced government tax revenue, as well as increased physician and pharmaceutical costs. (See accompanying backgrounder)

The Economic Costs of Waiting for Health Care

The wait times experienced by patients having to wait longer than medically reasonable for treatment impose costs not only on the patients themselves, but also on the economy as a whole. To accompany the BCMA's policy document released today, which provides recommendations to alleviate the long wait times in British Columbia, a study of the economic cost of waiting for care has also been released. Entitled The Economic Cost of Wait Times in Canada, the report was commissioned by the BC Medical Association and the Canadian Medical Association and examines the cost of waiting longer than medically recommended for treatment. While physicians have drawn attention to the health impact of excessive waits for care, this study is the first to attempt to determine the economic impact of these waits.

In 2005, the Wait Times Alliance (WTA) -- a group comprised of the CMA and six medical specialty organizations -- identified several wait time benchmarks. The Economic Cost of Wait Times report focuses on the costs associated with a patient's excess wait time after the WTA benchmark wait time has been reached in four key areas: joint replacement, cataract surgery, coronary bypass, and MRI scans; and in four provinces: BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario.

Three types of costs are taken into consideration:

- Patient Costs - This includes the reduced economic activity due to patients being unable to work, for example, reduced production of goods and services, lower income with lower income tax revenue, and less purchasing of consumer goods.

- Caregiver Costs - Some caregivers may have to give up their employment to take care of family members waiting for medical care. So as with patients, these caregivers' reduced income means additional reduced taxes and reduced spending in the marketplace.

- Healthcare System Costs - These include the additional costs to the health care system for extra medical appointments, tests, and procedures, and for additional medication that patients would not normally need had they been treated within the medically recommended time.

Measurement of these costs is based on historical wait times data provided by governments and other organizations in each province, and begins after the WTA benchmark has been reached until, on average, the patient has received his/her procedure.

The study found that although the costs vary among the four provinces, in British Columbia the cost of each patient who waits excessively for care are:

- Joint replacement - $10,864

- Cataract surgery - $1,017

- Cardiac bypass surgery - $10,238

- MRI scans - $5,065

Per-patient costs increase the longer the patient waits. Reducing the wait times of those patients waiting the longest for treatment will, therefore, result in the greatest savings. The cost of providing treatment earlier should rise on a per patient basis and with the number of patients treated.

Lets head over to the vaunted UK shall we?

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

luckytxn, you might wish to include a link to the original article so you're not accused of making this up.

the hospital food I have eaten in the US is pretty gross and tasteless too

the hospital food nessa had while she was in having the baby, nessa ranked it as very good.

yeah I am sure there are hospitals in both the US and Canada that have good food... I have had hospital stays in two different hospitals and both of them didn't have very good food...

maybe just a good example of the differences between kansas and cali

[luckytxn 2,265]

They ration?

Kidney cancer patients denied

life-saving drugs by NHS rationing body NICE

by staff writer, April 29, 2009 Daily Mail (UK)

Thousands of kidney cancer patients are likely to lose out on life-prolonging drugs.

The NHS rationing body, NICE, has confirmed a ban on three out of four new treatments.

It has reversed its position on just one, Sutent, which will now be allowed for patients with advanced cancer. But campaigners who fought NICE's original blanket ban said this was not enough. They said some patients with heart problems cannot tolerate Sutent.

Kate Spall, head of the Pamela Northcott Fund campaign group, said the ruling meant that fewer than half of newly diagnosed patients would be eligible for therapy.

She added: 'Families will be denied time together and doctors will be unable to give patients the best treatment.'

Campaigners are angry that NICE appears to have ignored new official guidelines widening access to life-prolonging drugs.

Sutent, also known as sunitinib, can double the life expectancy of patients, to 28 months, compared with standard interferon treatment. It costs around £24,000 a year.

The rejected drugs - bevacizumab (Avastin), sorafenib (Nexavar) and temsirolimus (Torisel) - have similar costs and are used in other countries.

Nicole Farmer, of Bayer Schering Pharma Oncology, which makes Nexavar, said: 'This shows why the UK sits 16 out of 18 EU countries with regard to cancer outcomes'.

Dr Thomas Powles, Clinical Senior Lecturer, at Barts and The London NHS Trust, said the 'one size fits all' policy would disadvantage many of the 7,000 patients diagnosed each year with kidney cancer.

He said: 'This one dimensional approach will leave some patients without potentially beneficial treatments, indeed some patients will not be eligible for any effective treatments whatsoever.'

Stella Pendleton, executive director of the Rarer Cancers Forum, said: 'This decision contradicts the spirit of the recommendations made by Professor Mike Richards on improving access to medicines for NHS patients, and highlights flaws in the current system for appraising drugs.

'We call on Nice to reverse this decision.'

[Marilyn. 340]

luckytxn, you might wish to include a link to the original article so you're not accused of making this up.

the hospital food I have eaten in the US is pretty gross and tasteless too

the hospital food nessa had while she was in having the baby, nessa ranked it as very good.

yeah I am sure there are hospitals in both the US and Canada that have good food... I have had hospital stays in two different hospitals and both of them didn't have very good food...

maybe just a good example of the differences between kansas and cali

[luckytxn 2,265]

Don't get cancer in the UK.

Cancer survivor confronts the

health secretary on 62-day wait

by Lyndsay Moss, March 21, 2009 The Scotsman

WAITING times for cancer treatment need to be cut, the Scottish Government was told yesterday.

The Scotland Against Cancer conference in Glasgow heard Nicola Sturgeon, the health secretary, setting out what was being done to improve cancer care for Scottish patients.

But one cancer survivor, who spoke at the Cancer Research UK event, challenged ministers to be more ambitious in reducing the time patients have to wait before starting treatment.

Cancer experts later said that patients elsewhere in Europe would be "outraged" by having to wait two months to start treatment, with most being seen within two weeks.

The current target of 62 days from urgent referral by a doctor to starting treatment has still not been met in Scotland, despite that originally being the target figure for 2005.

Ms Sturgeon stressed that the 62-day target was a maximum wait and many patients would start treatment much sooner.

Heather Goodare, who was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1986 when living in West Sussex, thanked Ms Sturgeon for the initiatives she had put in place to improve cancer care. But she challenged her over the "very unambitious" 62-day target.

"For some slow-growing cancers 31 days is perfectly OK, but for others it is just not acceptable at all," she told the health secretary.

Mrs Goodare, who now lives in Edinburgh, said when she was diagnosed over 22 years ago, she had to wait only two weeks before having surgery to remove the lump from her breast.

"I don't understand why things have gone backwards," she said.

Ms Sturgeon said everyone in the NHS had worked together to reduce waiting times and they were now very close to hitting the 62-day mark.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Just gonna assume that the long wait times are for minor surgeries.

NHS under fire over waiting times

by staff writer, February 25, 2009 The Scotsman

NHS LOTHIAN has come under fire from the Government for not "effectively" meeting 15-week waiting time treatment targets.

Statistics show that at the end of December there were 704 outpatients not being treated within that standard, and 316 inpatients. This is despite other sizeable health boards like Greater Glasgow and Clyde having a 100 per cent record on that front.

Privately, NHS Lothian chiefs are puzzled as to why Holyrood is exposing waiting times targets that have yet to come into force – it is not until the end of next month the official goal will come in.

They are confident that not only will they meet the target, but they'll achieve a 12-week maximum wait after that.

Lothians hospitals carry out 30,000–50,000 inpatient and day case procedures a month, meaning those who weren't seen within 15 weeks make up a tiny percentage.

Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon said: "Driving down waiting times is vital to ensure that patients get the treatment they need as quickly as possible. We know that waiting for diagnosis or treatment can be an anxious time for patients and their families which is why this government has put so much emphasis on cutting waiting times and making the system as transparent as possible."

Jackie Sansbury, director of strategic planning at NHS Lothian, said: "NHS Lothian's latest performance information shows we are very close to delivering success, as expected, on cutting the maximum waiting time for patients."

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I wonder why all this irrelevance that is the NHS is being quoted here. Again, nobody proposes the adoption of the UK health care model. Nobody.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Hard to understand for anyone here in the U.S. for a hospital having bed shortages.

Hundreds of operations cancelled at Lothian hospitals

by Adam Morris, February 19, 2009 The Scotsman

EIGHT operations in the Lothians are cancelled every week because of equipment failures, bed shortages and staffing levels, it has emerged.

In the last year, 420 elective procedures were cancelled, a significant rise on previous years.

The ERI suffered the most cancellations, with hundreds also being postponed at the Sick Kids, the Western General and St John's Hospital in Livingston. Critics said not enough bed space was provided in hospitals for times of need, although NHS chiefs pointed out that the cancellations equated to little over 0.5 per cent of all operations in the area – 65,000 operations in total were carried out last year.

Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act detailed the cancellations across the five Lothians hospitals where elective operations take place.

They come a day after the Evening News revealed plans by NHS Lothian to site a temporary mobile operating theatre in one of the car parks at Little France to drive down waiting lists.

Eight beds and one operating theatre would be provided for the ERI in a bid to ease waiting times for treatment.

One source at the ERI said: "It's all to do with a lack of beds. There was a Monday not so long ago when 19 operations were cancelled because there were no beds whatsoever. Consultants come up and ask me what's going on because they can't believe it.

"It's not an old problem. There were 1500 beds at the old ERI and 800 at this one – it is obvious what would happen."

The figures are up from 196 in 2007, however, in that period the new TRAK recording system used to monitor cancellations was not operational in St John's, and only used for half the year in the Sick Kids. Despite this, the numbers indicate that a rise was still evident. Cancellations were all as a result of a lack of beds, staffing, no resource or equipment breakdown.

Margaret Watt, chairwoman of the Scotland Patients Association, said: "This is totally unacceptable. To have more than one person a day, who's been on a waiting list, have a procedure cancelled is not on, and it knocks waiting lists even further back.

"We are short of beds, short of nurses and now it seems we are short of operating theatres."

James McCaffery, NHS Lothian's chief operating officer of acute services, said: "We were able to record the number of cases in only two sites in 2006, but the figure had increased to five within two years. As a result, the numbers of rescheduled procedures rose between 2007 and 2009, not because of an increase of cases but because of more efficient and universal recording method.

"A total of 190,711 elective procedures were carried out between 2006 and 2008 in NHS Lothian and, unfortunately, 802 had to be rescheduled during these three years. This was caused by a variety of different reasons, but in every case, another appointment was arranged at the patient's earliest convenience."

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Keep bringing up the irrelevant. It sure is entertaining.

If you want to look at relevant data, try this:

Resources in the health sector (human, physical)

Despite the relatively high level of health expenditure in the United States, there are fewer physicians per capita than in most other OECD countries. In 2002, the United States had 2.3 practising physicians per 1000 population, below the OECD average of 2.9.

There were 7.9 nurses per 1 000 population in the United States in 2002, which is slightly lower than theaverage of 8.2 across OECD countries.

The number of acute care hospital beds in the United States in 2003 was 2.8 per 1 000 population, also lower than the OECD average of 4.1 beds per 1 000 population. As in most OECD countries, the number of hospital beds per capita has fallen over the past twenty years, from 4.4 beds per 1 000 population in 1980 to 2.8 in 2003. This decline has coincided with a reduction in average length of stays in hospitals and an increase in day-surgery patients.

Not that I am looking to shatter any dreams but we're not far ahead in any measure other than cost - the one measure you wouldn't want to be found on top.

Edited August 9, 2009 by Mr. Big Dog

[luckytxn 2,265]

That has all to do with the government taking over health care and yes they are planning on eventually taking over ALL health care.

Now I did a few of the UK and there are many stories of each and every country that has the government meddling in healthcare. Any country anyone want to learn about more?

[luckytxn 2,265]

Ok we all love Australia so much so lets see how they are doing. Australians retain about 30% of private insurance. They are relatively new at this and this is where we are starting.

Public patients wait

longer for surgery

by staff writer

June 29, 2005 The Sydney Morning Herald

Patients in the nation's public hospitals are waiting longer to have surgery than they were six years ago, a new report has found.

In Tasmania's public hospitals, the situation is especially bleak, with patients waiting more than 14 months - up to 432 days - to have a total knee replacement, and 393 days for cataract extraction.

The national average for a hip replacement was 134 days and 82 days for cataract extraction.

The government report, The State of Our Public Hospitals, relied on statistics provided by public hospitals for the 2003/04 period.

It showed elective surgery waiting times had worsened since 1999, with just over 15 per cent of patients not being operated on within the clinically-appropriate time.

The report said nationally, admissions for elective surgery within the set timeframe fell by six per cent between 1998/99 and 2003/04.

"This means that you were less likely to be seen within the recommended time in 2003/04 than you were six years ago," the report said.

It said many people mistakenly thought the term "elective surgery" meant choosing to undergo a non-essential or optional surgical procedure.

"Much of the elective surgery undertaken in Australia's hospitals is urgent and critical, such as coronary bypass operations and hip replacements, which are clearly necessary and often fundamental for a person's wellbeing," it said.

Chair of the Australian Medical Association Federal Council, Dana Wainwright, said the jump in elective surgery wait times was a major worry.

"Our public hospitals are in serious trouble, they're slowly deteriorating and we are very concerned," Dr Wainwright said.

"The hospitals are overloaded and under-bedded and unless somebody moves to fix the problem now, we'll end up with a two-tiered system: public and private."

The data also revealed just over 30 per cent of emergency patients in Australia's public hospitals did not receive treatment within the recommended time over the 12-month period.

South Australia fared worst, where 55 per cent of emergency patients were not seen within the recommended timeframe.

Queensland, the Northern Territory, Tasmania and NSW were also below the national average of 69 per cent, while Victoria and Western Australia had the best record for seeing emergency patients within the prescribed time.

Australian Healthcare Association executive director Prue Power, whose organisation represents public hospitals, said faced with a growing number of admissions and workforce shortages, the public sector was struggling to cope.

"The pressure on public hospitals can't continue if we are going to maintain a high-quality of care and a satisfied workforce," Ms Power said.

"There are problems in the system - partly to do with a lack of funding and a lack of transparency in funding, a stretched workforce and a lack of real collaboration between the public and private sectors."

Health Minister Tony Abbott said the government was taking pressure off the public health system through private health incentives.

Painful wait for care

by Luke McIlveen

February 17, 2005 Herald Sun (Australia)

DELAYS in emergency departments are risking lives: one in six Victorians suffering conditions such as chest pains is forced to wait more than 10 minutes for treatment.

And one in five awaiting elective surgery for painful or disabling ailments is forced to wait more than three months.

The most urgent elective cases in the past year were treated within the standard 30 days, but only 79 per cent of category two patients were seen in the standard 90 days.

Department of Health figures reveal bed and staff shortages.

The Health Services Union blamed a lack of staff and inadequate government funding.

It has led to a campaign to encourage people with minor ailments to see GPs, to take the pressure off public hospitals.

The Department of Health said all patients needing resuscitation were treated immediately.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That has all to do with the government taking over health care and yes they are planning on eventually taking over ALL health care.

That's an unsubstantiated claim that doesn't even rise close to the level of fact. But keep telling yourself that.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Operating theatres shut to

save cash as thousands wait

for surgery

by Nick O'Malley

November 23, 2004 Sydney Morning Herald

Hospitals are closing operating theatres to doctors wanting to perform planned surgery for up to a third of the year to save money, despite there being almost 70,000 people on NSW waiting lists.

Nepean Hospital surgeon Richard Hanney said the hospital suspended planned surgery for around 12 weeks each year, including breaks over Christmas, Easter and other school holidays.

Also, surgeons were expected to give up a day's worth of operating every two months to make room for more emergency surgery. As a result, some doctors who were available to do one list a week for 52 weeks were getting into the theatres for only 35 weeks a year.

The most recently available figures show that last September there were 2524 people waiting for planned surgery at Nepean, including 762 who had waited for more than a year.

Dr Hanney, a member of the board of the NSW branch of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, said it was hard to work out just how long the state's teaching hospitals were closed to planned surgery, because each hospital restricted it in different ways.

For example, aside from holiday shutdowns, the Royal North Shore Hospital ceases to perform elective surgery after 3pm each day.

The president of the NSW branch of the Australian Medical Association, John Gullotta, said an AMA phone survey showed some of Sydney's teaching hospitals had increased their holiday shutdowns since 2002. It revealed the Prince of Wales Hospital ceased performing elective surgery for four weeks over the 2002 holiday season.

The hospital will do likewise this year but for six weeks from December 19.

Dr Gullotta said he did not believe there was any reason to stop performing planned surgery except on the major public holidays.

The Opposition health spokesman, Barry O'Farrell, yesterday attacked the State Government for allowing elective surgery operating times to be cut while waiting lists were so high.

"There are currently 65,348 people waiting for elective surgery in NSW. More than 9000 have been waiting over a year," he said.

"There is no doubt that waiting lists would be reduced if the Carr Government showed a greater commitment to funding surgery times."

Representatives of three area health services contacted by the Herald yesterday said that the holiday suspension of elective surgery was to give staff and surgeons time off.

As well, they said, patients preferred not to have surgery during peak holiday periods.

Nurses upset over staffing shortages at Maitland Hospital have closed 26 beds.

The nurses carried out their threat of industrial action after representatives of the NSW Nurses Association met the Hunter Area Health Service's Reasonable Workloads Committee to ask for extra staff.

It is believed to be the first time such action has been taken by nurses in NSW. Four of the paediatrics ward's 14 beds, four of the medical ward's 34 beds and eight of the surgical ward's 34 beds have been closed.

The general secretary of the association, Brett Holmes, said nurses were furious that Hunter Health had not provided sufficient funds to employ enough nurses to run the hospital safely.

A Hunter Health spokeswoman said additional nurses were being recruited.

Please keep telling yourself that also as the Koolaid is not wearing off anytime soon for you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I guess we should start posting articles about horror stories in the US healthcare system. Whoever posts the most "wins"