Manitoba Wait Times Rising for Heart Surgery

[Smallc]

]

Edited May 20, 2010 by Smallc

[Jack Weber]

....ummm.....

Yeah...I saw that....

[Michael Hardner]

It's my thread and I'm sticking to it.

See it's not just Canucks fascinated with Yankees...

[Jack Weber]

See it's not just Canucks fascinated with Yankees...

It's never been about American vs Canadian with him...

It's simply about him... the nationalist stuff is simply cover...

Edited May 20, 2010 by Jack Weber

[bush_cheney2004]

See it's not just Canucks fascinated with Yankees...

I'm doing my level best to balance the equation!

Edited May 20, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Michael Hardner]

Ummm, yes there is. Reports are released every year giving letter grads to different performances from many different organizations, from CIHI, to the OECD, to the FCPP.

CIHI is good, but not well known and they don't provide regular and simple reports that are understandable. Also, they've been doing this for awhile now and their reports tend to reflect the problems that are out there. I would prefer some kind of information that would force change back onto the system it reports on and that's not going to happen with CIHI.

FCPP ? Is that Frontier Centre for Public Policy ? They seem like a think-tank kind of one-off report generating organization who will shock the system with random news releases from time to time but still not what we need.

OECD ? Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ? That would be sad if we had to rely on international agencies to tell us how we're doing.

Manitoba Health also releases more and more reports. You simply want there to be a problem where there isn't one. It isn't always possible to compile information to everything, nor is it worthwhile when the public probably won't 'get' it anyway. When talking about emergency care, as I was, examples and reports are an excellent way to get information.

Admittedly, my perspective is Ontarian. I don't want there to be a problem where there isn't one, but there is one in Ontario - and that's that nobody knows what is going on, and nobody has the slightest idea of how to find out.

The public won't "get it" is a condescending approach. Although I'm given to thinking that myself, we have to trust a basic intelligence of the public and that would certainly be possible in the case of presenting performance stats that even lowly CEOs could understand.

Please do provide links to Manitoba reports and I will check them out. I have a sincere interest in this, as I feel that if Canada ever "got" the bug to hold our government to a higher standard there would be a new quiet revolution that could propel us to a new level.

I'm suspicious, I must admit, of your knowledge of this. I have posted on this here and on other boards as well as my blog for years and the only ones ever interested tend to be 'insiders'. I also happened to meet a guy who worked for the McGuinty government once, who was charged with measuring the effectivenss of their PR. By the end of that evening, I had exhausted him with my criticisms of how government is run... I don't think he was expecting me to have such strong opinions on the topic of public information management (he he he ) and very much talked down to me for the first 20 minutes or so of our conversation, no doubt thinking I was one of those who didn't get it.

All that said, I enjoy the topic and although I am passionate about it, I don't think discussion falls easily into party lines so one can discuss these things rather freely.

On reports though....soon, our systems will spend so much on reports, they won't be able to pay for much else. I'm really not sure what you're asking for.

Crap.

Reporting is done anyway and part of the problem is that new reports such as those provided for CIHI are 'added on'. They actually hire people to get data twice, and to ask questions of people who ask other people questions. There's no cohesive information design that undertaken. A mess.

I heard a prominent hospital head on CBC Toronto a few months back and he talked about bringing in some other disciplines to their service design ... and (of course) drastically improving the situation by offering 24 access to MRIs ( I think that was the example, although now it seems to me that it may have been different. IN any case....)

I was basically shocked that they had been running their services in a bubble for this long (It's 2010 !) and not reaching out for expertise in other areas. This is one thing that competition would alleviate, but if we don't want to privatize then we have to open up the system to analysis and scrutiny. Otherwise, it's just the system watching itself.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Michael Hardner

[Jack Weber]

.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Michael Hardner]

I'm doing my level best to balance the equation!

While I do meet Americans who are enamoured of Canada - and our spelling - they tend to be North East college-educated liberal types. Where are you from again ? Did you go to post secondary education ? Are there right-wing schools there ?

[Smallc]

The latest report was on critical incidents. I don't have the time to find it right now. I can assure you that I'm not an insider.

[GostHacked]

I also provide free geography lessons for wayward DJs....Alberta is not Manitoba....but it is Canada.

Thanks for that, I've been to both Manitoba and Alberta. I've seen a great portion of this country and my geography is pretty good. Always did well in geography classes and in most trivia. No longer a wayward DJ. I retired from that about 10 years ago.

Nice to see you've derailed your own thread.

It's my thread and I'm sticking to it.

No doubts about that, this is your thread.

[bush_cheney2004]

Thanks for that, I've been to both Manitoba and Alberta. I've seen a great portion of this country and my geography is pretty good. Always did well in geography classes and in most trivia. No longer a wayward DJ. I retired from that about 10 years ago.

Perhaps I spelled "Manitoba" wrong? My bad.

Nice to see you've derailed your own thread.

I get paid either way.

No doubts about that, this is your thread.

Oh...the irony...of being ignored!

[Moonlight Graham]

Pretty much. You know, thinking about it, I can't help but feel that this story was designed to provoke a response from me. I'll remember for next time....and I won't bother.

Hey now don't flatter yourself. This thread is obviously done in spite & is just a lame attempt to try to stir some poop and stick his tongue out at people. I was beating on him that the WHO ranks Canada as having a better healthcare system than the U.S., and i guess that's added to the chapped butt he's got lately. I don't know why anyone bothered to respond to this thread, but now that its 5 pages long why not join the trainwreck & then say "adios".

BC is some old cranky dude with too much time on his hands, and a thread like this just makes his day a wee bit more interesting.

[Michael Hardner]

All of us - especially those in favour of public healthcare - need to stir things and start throwing stones at the system. Too often, we simply are satisfied with "it's better than the US system". There's no surer way of assuring its collapse than comparing it to something completely different.

With regards to the indifference on the topic - get a load of all the replies when I started this topic last Canada Day.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=14437&view=&hl=ehealth&fromsearch=1

I stopped posting about it after that. If MapleLeafWeb isn't interested, then nobody is.

[Moonlight Graham]

With regards to the indifference on the topic - get a load of all the replies when I started this topic last Canada Day.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=14437&view=&hl=ehealth&fromsearch=1

I stopped posting about it after that. If MapleLeafWeb isn't interested, then nobody is.

Well, honestly, the post is quite long, i probably wouldn't have read it either. Maybe skimmed it.

I disagree that people don't care about healthcare. It's a huge issue to voters that will just get bigger as the baby boomers age. There is obviously apathy among the public towards politics and many don't bother voting, but for actual voters i think its a big issue (since voter turnout increases among age groups the older the age).

[bush_cheney2004]

Hey now don't flatter yourself. This thread is obviously done in spite & is just a lame attempt to try to stir some poop and stick his tongue out at people. I was beating on him that the WHO ranks Canada

Hey...this is pretty cool...you two are fighting over which one deserved the bait! LOL!

BC is some old cranky dude with too much time on his hands, and a thread like this just makes his day a wee bit more interesting.

It's all good....young pups like smallc don't know what it means to wrassle a hog in the mud....the hog enjoys it!

[Jack Weber]

All of us - especially those in favour of public healthcare - need to stir things and start throwing stones at the system. Too often, we simply are satisfied with "it's better than the US system". There's no surer way of assuring its collapse than comparing it to something completely different.

With regards to the indifference on the topic - get a load of all the replies when I started this topic last Canada Day.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=14437&view=&hl=ehealth&fromsearch=1

I stopped posting about it after that. If MapleLeafWeb isn't interested, then nobody is.

I agree...Comparing us to that train wreck down south to try to make us feel better only masks a serious discussion this country needs to have concerning the delivery of health care.The fact of the matter is,very soon we will have alot more people drawing on the system than paying into it.And the costs are going to increase dramatically...

[Smallc]

I agree...Comparing us to that train wreck down south to try to make us feel better only masks a serious discussion this country needs to have concerning the delivery of health care.The fact of the matter is,very soon we will have alot more people drawing on the system than paying into it.And the costs are going to increase dramatically...

That is, unfortunately though, the case for every western country in existence. Whether healthcare is being paid for by government of premiums, it's still being paid for by the same populations. As long as healthcare costs are rising faster than economic growth, there's a problem. Raise taxes, or shift the costs to the private sector...it's still going to cost the same people the same money. In fact, it can be argued that moving it to the private sector will cost the same people more money.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Smallc

[bush_cheney2004]

.... In fact, it can be argued that moving it to the private sector will cost the same people more money.

But not very well argued, when it can be demonstrated that putting more consumer skin in the game will reduce demand and costs. As long as insurance dollars chase services in an ever widening spiral, there will be no change to the status quo. Seniors and end-of-life costs are gobbling up a huge chunk of available dollars.

[Michael Hardner]

Well, honestly, the post is quite long, i probably wouldn't have read it either. Maybe skimmed it.

I disagree that people don't care about healthcare. It's a huge issue to voters that will just get bigger as the baby boomers age. There is obviously apathy among the public towards politics and many don't bother voting, but for actual voters i think its a big issue (since voter turnout increases among age groups the older the age).

Interesting take. I usually try to either make the anchor post of a thread substantial - if it's about a new topic or something that deserves attention, OR I make it just a "what do you think of this" type comment if it points to a linked story.

People do care about healthcare in a pervasive and general way, but they don't care enough to pay extra attention to the details and to invest effort into tracking things. I don't want to convey the idea that anybody would say "I don't care about healthcare." That's clearly not what's going on.

What is going on is that people aren't aware that they have the ability to make things better by investing attention in the details of how services are delivered. And there's a gap in tools there that would allow people to pay attention as well.

It's a tall order, but I would like people to start asking "where are the graphs ?" and "why is my hospital not included in this report ?". "Why are these surveys taken so infrequently ?".

It's a tall order, but if people don't want privatization or two-tier then they have to provide all the energy and management oversight that naturally comes when there is competition.

[Michael Hardner]

Raise taxes, or shift the costs to the private sector...it's still going to cost the same people the same money. In fact, it can be argued that moving it to the private sector will cost the same people more money.

This is why I continue to think you have some kind of inside angle, as this type of futility is usually expressed by those inside the gates, who have no imagination. Of course costs can be reduced, service can be improved and waste can be taken out of the system.

If you disagree with me, then show me some statistics. Oh right... we don't have good statistics.

Like the hospital administrator who didn't consult outside the system for years, it sometimes seems like there are no answers but it's not so.

[Smallc]

This is why I continue to think you have some kind of inside angle, as this type of futility is usually expressed by those inside the gates, who have no imagination. Of course costs can be reduced, service can be improved and waste can be taken out of the system.

Obviously you didn't get what I said, since the above is my exact point. It doesn't matter how we pay for it (government or private), we have to find a way to make it cost less. So far as I can tell, all countries have rising costs, and given slow economic growth rates in Europe and now the US (and us, to a lesser extent), it's a problem that has to be solved somehow.

And rather quickly. There are some signs, such as the things that Ontario, BC, and Quebec are doing. I support some of those things (lowering drug payments in Ontario, Charging a yearly premium in Quebec...though I'd rather they just raised taxes, since that's all they're really doing, and possibly having the money follow the patient in large hospitals, as BC is trying) and I don't support others (charging patients for each doctor visit in Quebec at $25 a visit up to $250 or 1% of income, whichever comes first - though it is a bit better if it isn't charged upfront and instead on income tax, as some are suggesting).

We'll see if some of these things work. My province actually spends less money as a total budget expenditure than any of these three at just over 38% (it's in the 2010 budget papers somewhere). These provinces are all spending over 40%. There is obviously some savings to be had (though in fairness to them, Manitoba does have a shortage of some specialists, something that most of them don't...though we are thankfully fixing that problem).

Edited May 21, 2010 by Smallc

[Born Free]

........ As long as insurance dollars chase services in an ever widening spiral, there will be no change to the status quo.

Thanks for making smallc's case.

[Michael Hardner]

Obviously you didn't get what I said, since the above is my exact point. It doesn't matter how we pay for it (government or private), we have to find a way to make it cost less.

Sorry, I didn't get that from your post.

So far as I can tell, all countries have rising costs, and given slow economic growth rates in Europe and now the US (and us, to a lesser extent), it's a problem that has to be solved somehow.

We have an opportunity with the web to open things up to public scrutiny. The disorganization and duplication of services that you often hear about may be examined if things were more visible.

[Smallc]

Sorry, I didn't get that from your post.

We have an opportunity with the web to open things up to public scrutiny. The disorganization and duplication of services that you often hear about may be examined if things were more visible.

See above for more info that I added to my previous post.

[Michael Hardner]

See above for more info that I added to my previous post.

Ok, let's see:

And rather quickly. There are some signs, such as the things that Ontario, BC, and Quebec are doing. I support some of those things (lowering drug payments in Ontario, Charging a yearly premium in Quebec...though I'd rather they just raised taxes, since that's all they're really doing, and possibly having the money follow the patient in large hospitals, as BC is trying) and I don't support others (charging patients for each doctor visit in Quebec at $25 a visit up to $250 or 1% of income, whichever comes first - though it is a bit better if it isn't charged upfront and instead on income tax, as some are suggesting).

I don't see these changes as being that imaginative.

We'll see if some of these things work. My province actually spends less money as a total budget expenditure than any of these three at just over 38% (it's in the 2010 budget papers somewhere). These provinces are all spending over 40%. There is obviously some savings to be had (though in fairness to them, Manitoba does have a shortage of some specialists, something that most of them don't...though we are thankfully fixing that problem).

I don't agree with the % of budget metric. I'm interested in raw dollars spent per person, and services provided. Also in where the money goes. If I had enough insiders, then I would start a club to have somebody explain it to us.