“the world is not the way they tell you it is”*
DESCRIPTION
“The World Is Not the Way They Tell You it Is”*. Robert G. Evans Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, UBC April 4, 2008 The Money Game “Adam Smth” (George Goodman) 1966. This is a story about:. Myth and Reality Identity, Anxiety, and Money. (Ibid.). For Example:. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
“The World Is Not the Way They Tell You it Is”*
Robert G. Evans
Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, UBC
April 4, 2008
The Money Game “Adam Smth” (George Goodman) 1966
This is a story about:
• Myth and Reality
• Identity,
• Anxiety, and• Money. (Ibid.)
For Example:
• CANADA NEEDS MORE DOCTORS!!!
• (The CMA)
Figure 1: Canadian Medical Schools, 1960/61 to 2007/08
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1st. Year Enrolment Graduates 4 years later
And is about to get them, in spades.
• Policies ten years ago have determined our future for the next decade, at least
• Increased training places now would only add to the surplus twenty years from now.
But what about the terrible shortage TODAY!
• Has anyone checked the trends in medical services use (or at least in physician billings)?
• Expenditures per capita, adjusting for inflation, have been rising rapidly for a decade now.
Figure 2: Expenditure on Physicians' Services, Canada and B.C., constant $ per capita, 1975-2007
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006f
2007f
B.C. - CIHI deflator Canada -- CIHI deflator B.C. - BCMA fee Index
Growth in Expenditures per capita, B.C.1997$, p.a., alternative deflators
BCMA CIHI• 1978-2005 2.45% 1.61%
• 1978-1991 2.90% 2.02%• 1991-2005 2.04% 1.22%
• 1991-1996 0.05% -0.32%• 1996-2005 3.17% 2.04%• 2005-2007 -- 2.44%
Figure 4: Expenditure on Physicians' Services, Canada and B.C., constant $ per capita, 1960-2007
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1070
1071
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
f 20
07 f
B.C. - CIHI deflator Canada -- CIHI deflator B.C. - BCMA fee Index Canada historical
Figure 7: Expenditure per Physician, Canada and B.C., constant $ per capita, 1975-2006
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006f
B.C. - CIHI deflator Canada -- CIHI deflator B.C. - BCMA fee Index
Growth in Expenditures per Physician, B.C.1997$, p.a., alternative deflators
BCMA CIHI• 1978-2005 1.79% 0.96%
• 1978-1991 1.68% 0.82%• 1991-2005 1.90% 1.08%
• 1991-1996 0.38% 0.01%• 1996-2005 2.76% 1.68%
Is Physician Productivity Really Rising That Fast?
• If yes, why do we need more doctors?
• If no, what are they billing for?
But How Many Doctors Are There?
• The number of doctors per capita has hardly changed in twenty years
• In 1990, this ratio was called a surplus.
• True, the population have aged, but in itself this makes little difference (0.3% -0.5% per year)
Figure 5: Canada, Physicians per 10,000 Population, 1968-2006
0
5
10
15
20
25
All physicians Specialists Family physicians
Figure 6: Canada, Physicians per 10,000 Population, 1968-2006
0
5
10
15
20
25
All physicians Specialists Family physicians BC total BC Specs. BC GP/FPs
Yet Doctors Are Working Less
• Decline in Self-Reported Weekly Hours of Work, Canadian GP/FPs
• Watson et al. (1993-2003) 8.5%
• Crossley et al. (1982-2003) 15.6%
So: Widespread perceptions (and loud claims) of shortage
• Same number of doctors,• Each (on average) working fewer hours, and• Providing or at least billing for more and more
services, • Large increase in doctor supply on the
immediate horizon
But Other Countries Have More Doctors!!!
• Indeed they do, but there is no relation between doctor numbers and health status
• For that matter, there is no relation between health spending and health status either, at least not in high income countries.
Why Does the CMA Want More Doctors?
At CMA, defending and promoting the interests of Canada’s doctors is central to our mission. Advancing the medical community’s financial interests is an important element of that commitment.” -- Victor Dirnfeld, former president, CMA
“To every complex question there is a simple answer: Neat, Plausible, and Wrong.” H.L. Mencken
Another Example: Underfunded and Fiscally Unsustainable?
• Canada’s health care system is not fiscally unsustainable
• In international terms it is well-financed• There are still many opportunities for
improved efficiency• But the twin propositions above boil down to
an argument for cost-shifting from public to private budgets, and cost expansion
"General Government Net Financial Liabilities (% of GDP) G-7 Countries 1970 - 2006
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
%
Canada United States Japan United Kingdom Germany France Italy G7 Average
Figure 1National Health Expenditure as Percent of GDP, Selected OECD Countries, 1960-2005
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Perc
ent o
f GDP
OECD Avg. Canada U.S. U.K.
Figure 2National Health Expenditure as Deviation from OECD Average, Selected Countries, 1960-
2005
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
Canada U.S. U.K.
• Health spending did significantly increase its share of provincial government spending – but NOT or revenue, and this expenditure trend ended several years ago.
• “Apocalyptic demography” is also a myth. The aging population will require increases in health spending, but will not strain a growing economy.
Figure 3 Canadian Provincial Government Expenditures as percent of GDP, 1980/81 to
2006/07
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Total Health Other Programs Non-Program
Medicare Health/All Program
Figure 7B: Canada, Provincial Government Expenditure on Medicare and on All Health Programs, as a Share ot Total Revenue, with and without Tax Cuts, 1980/81 to 2005/06
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
All Health Exp. over All Rev. M'care Exp. Over All Rev. All Health Exp. Over Aug. All Rev. M'care Exp. Over Aug. All Rev.
Figure 6A: Canada, Provincial Governments, Total Revenues over Total Expenditures, 1980/81 to 2006/07
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
80/81
81/82
82/83
83/84
84/85
85/86
86/87
87/88
88/89
89/90
90/91
91/92
92/93
93/94
94/95
95/96
96/97
97/98
98/99
99/00
00/01
01/02
02/03
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
All Rev. /All Exp. Program Exp./All Exp. Tax Aug. Rev./All Exp.
So Why Tell Lies?
Myths obscure the real objectives of: 1) Transferring costs from the healthy and
wealthy to the unhealthy and unwealthy,
2) Improving access for the wealthy and unhealthy, and
3) Expanding income opportunities for strategically placed providers.
• REFORM: Improve, make better, eliminate accumulated inefficiencies and abuses
• RE-FORM: Change the structure, for better or for worse
• REACTION: Restore past practices or structures, remove innovations
• GENERAL BENEFITS: A shared objective of more effective, efficient, timely, humane, health care. (Rousseau’s General Will)
• REDISTRIBUTION: Inherent conflict over the balance of benefits and burdens among the members of the population. (Resulting in Rousseau’s Will of All)
ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF PAYING FOR HEALTH CARE
GOVERNMENTS
SOCIAL INSURANCE
PRIVATE INSURANCE
NET TAXES
SOCIAL INSURANCE
PRIVATE
OUT-OF-POCKET CHARGES
HEALTH CARE
RESOURCES
INCOMES
FIRMS
PEOPLE
Total Revenues = Total Expenditures =Total Incomes
[FOR HEALTH]
PREMIUMS
PREMIUMS
GL
OB
AL
BU
DG
ET
S
CA
PIT
AT
ION
FE
E-F
OR
-SE
RV
ICE
NOTFOR
PROFIT
NOTONLYFOR
PROFIT
FORPROFIT
GOVERN-MENT
AGENCIES
WHO PAYS?How is the total bill divided among the population?
WHO GETS?Are access, quality, timeliness based on need or
ability/willingness to pay?
WHO GETS PAID?How much are providers paid, and how much is taken
out in administrative overheads?
Yet Another Example: B.C.’s Fair Pharmacare
Redistribution of income from drug users to taxpayers, i.e. from unhealthy and unwealthy to healthy and wealthy
• Partial mitigation through income-related subsidies
• Effect on access unclear, drug use apparently unchanged.
• Longer-term increase in expenditures due to reduced purchaser bargaining power. Income transfer from drug users and taxpayers to drug manufacturers
Genuine Reform Might Address:
• Efficiency and Effectiveness of care provided
• -- Micro, the hospital porter story
• -- macro, the clinical variations stories
• Large Variations in patterns of care among:
• 1) Regions• 2) Hospitals• 3) Individual Clinicians
• Unrelated to patient needs, characteristics, or outcomes
H o s p ita l A d m is s io n R a te s , S e le c te d C a rd ia c C o nd it io ns , C a na d ia n C it ie s ,1 9 9 6 /9 7 to 1 9 9 9 /0 0
0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 2 0 0
per 1
00,0
00 p
op'n
20+,
age
adj
uste
d
American studies of regional variations: Higher utilization and costs associated with:
• Poorer quality,• Higher mortality• No greater patient satisfaction,
• But more physicians (specialists) and hospital capacity
• Better Health?
• Greater Effectiveness and Efficiency?
• Or Just More Activity and Higher Cost?
• Well….
• Expenditure Equals Income