Health -   

1

'Sicker' Canadians struggle to obtain treatment: report

health generic
health generic

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (14) Facebook   

More on this topic

Date: Monday Dec. 12, 2011 6:41 AM ET

TORONTO — Canadians with chronic conditions are frequent users of the health-care system, but a new report shows many experience considerable difficulty getting the medical treatment they need.

So-called sicker Canadians -- most of whom are age 50 or older -- have one or more of seven chronic conditions: high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, joint pain or arthritis, chronic lung problems such as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and mental health problems such as depression or anxiety.

Those who are chronically ill are among the highest users of health services: they are more likely to be hospitalized, have surgery, visit emergency departments and take prescription medications.

But cost can be a major barrier to accessing that care, says the Health Council of Canada, citing results from the 2011 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey, which included almost 4,000 Canadians.

Almost a quarter of respondents who rated their health as fair or poor reported skipping a dose of medication or not filling a prescription due to the cost, compared with just 10 per cent of other Canadians, the survey found.

The council said that one-in-four ratio is significant because 90 per cent of sicker Canadians take at least one prescription drug, while 54 per cent take four or more medications. As well, about one in eight said they have skipped a recommended test or followup treatment due to cost concerns, compared to just five per cent of those without chronic health problems.

"The experiences of patients with chronic conditions can tell us a lot about the quality of the health-care system as a whole and the progress we have made," council CEO John Abbott said in a statement Monday. "The data here tells us we need to be concerned that there are many Canadians who still cannot afford treatment of their chronic conditions.

"We need to address this immediately, because medications that prevent complications from chronic disease are vital in contributing to better quality of life for individuals, and reduced health-care costs for the system."

Almost 60 per cent of those with ongoing health concerns have below-average household incomes, making it difficult to afford certain types of care and medications. Secondary costs such as paying for transportation to appointments, child care and lost wages from time away from work can also present obstacles to care, the Health Council said.

In fact, 12 per cent of sicker patients reported not visiting a doctor due to cost concerns, compared with just four per cent of other Canadians. Over a quarter of health-care services are paid for through private sources, either out-of-pocket by patients or through private insurance.

The survey also found that this group of patients fares worse when it comes to co-ordination of care. People with chronic conditions are likely to see multiple providers and specialists, yet many said they didn't always receive help from their doctor's office in co-ordinating that care.

About half of patients had to wait a month or longer to see a specialist, while almost one-quarter said test results or medical records were not available when they arrived for their appointments.

The survey showed sicker Canadians felt less engaged in their health care compared with others in the country. Overall, 36 per cent said their doctors didn't explain their health concerns in an easily understood manner and 45 per cent felt they did not get enough time with their physician.

"It's important that doctors know my medical history and are up to speed on my health results," said Frank Austin, a stroke survivor and patient advocate. "There needs to be improved communication among health-care providers so that time is not wasted and the risk of errors in my care is reduced."

Still, there were some positive results from respondents with chronic conditions: more had a regular doctor or clinic for care -- 96 per cent versus 86 per cent of the general population. They also found it easier to get care after-hours or to get an appointment with a doctor the same or next day.

While such results are promising, the council said much improvement is needed.

The report recommends a number of ways to eliminate cost barriers, including increasing use of alternatives to face-to-face visits, such as telemedicine, email and phone consultations. To improve co-ordination of care, widespread use of electronic medical records in Canada would reduce costs and improve efficiency, the council said.

The 2011 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy survey involved about 19,000 randomly chosen adults from 11 countries, who were interviewed by telephone between March and June. The survey included 3,958 Canadians.

Comments are now closed for this story

SUE
said
0 0

It is not just the elderly that get refused care. Certain illnesses are openly discriminated against due to political interference. Take lyme for example, they just deny treatment and proper testing, crippling many that are actually cureable. All scientific research is ignored, and people's lives are ruined. Now I can no longer work, due to lack of treatment, I can no longer afford to even relieve the pain. Is it not fraud to take my money for health care and then refuse basic care due to political reasons?


sad
said
0 0

My grandmother is now 93 and has been in a home for the last 15 years. She has no memory of any of her children believes she is a child some days forgets who she is the next. She requires assistants to clean, dress and feed herself. She sits in a chair or walks the halls all day long. She is basically a house plant. She is fed and watered every day, and waits to die. It is a complete tragedy. But the home continues to make a fortune off of the thousands of seniors who are just like her.What on earth do you do?


LorraineH
said
0 0

@Paul in Montreal
In your world, Paul, who will decide if the offending adult is or will be productive enough to warrant treatment to ensure continuation of their life such as it may be?

Is there a "Government" department that should be established?

Does your rationale include younger people (who haven't had time to smoke or drink enough to damage organs) who are stricken with cancers, heart ailments, progressive diseases, etc.?

Do we let our terminally ill young people die faster, albeit comfortably, rather than try to prolong and ease what more time we may be able to give them?

Does "active part of humanity" mean the ability to pay taxes to fund life saving measures and life sustaning treatments for those deemed worthy?

Most elderly people have a "Living Will" which, in the case of my 95 year old mother who smokes means that she will be treated for her illnesses but no intrusive treatment will be done. She made this Living Will when she was in her 80's. She pays for insurance for her medication and pays the difference in cost. She also has paid taxes all her life which helps fund medicare.

Don't blame the lack of money in Medicare on sick elderly people. It is mismanagement of funds, too much bureaucracy, paying full costs for optional treatments such as, in Quebec, IVF treatments at up to $45,000 for high income people, etc. etc.


Andrew in Vancouver
said
0 0

I know a guy that became grossly obese and wore his hip bones down. They became infected and he spent 9 months in the hospital before receiving 2 hip replacements. In the past few years following the operations he doesn't even walk on them. He goes everywhere on his scooter. That seems like over a million dollars for absolutely nothing. He got the best of care in the hospital including a private room much of the time because his sister is a head nurse.


Bob in Chatham
said
0 0

I think that it is very selfish for younger people to think they have some priority to health care. As a 70 year old I have paid into the heath care system through a variety of taxes for a long time. I feel that I have the same rights as anyone else to the services that are provided. Not to mention that I shell out $270 a month for health insurance since our system doesn't cover many drugs or dental care, physio, chiropractors, etc.


Paul in Montreal
said
0 0

It's ridiculous when you have 80 year olds who continue to smoke and drink while undergoing extremely costly treatment for cirrhosis and COPD as an example. People have to learn to take responsibility for their own health management and stop thinking that there will always be a safety net to fall into. Eventually it will all come down to survival of the fittest, as nature intended. The weakest of the herd should be allowed to follow the course of nature and not hang on as an unproductive and non contributing burden on the herd, putting the health and safety of those that are strong in jeopardy. Of course I believe in basic life saving measures and life sustaining treatment, as long as it is to ensure the recovery of an individual that will continue to be an active contributing part of humanity., not so they can lie in a bed for 10 years jammed with tubes and pumped with meds. We have always fought nature as a species and will continue to do so, and as a result the entire species is paying the price.


Sue McPherson
said
0 0

Mq, my thoughts: Don't judge everyone by your dad's experience. If he is ready to let go, good enough. But don't let his wishes determine all old people’s desires. Life-prolonging drugs? Anything - eg AIDS and cancer drugs can be put in this category if someone decides it's your time. I agree it is a problem that old people with little money may want to keep going despite not being able to function well, but having what you refer to as the "healthy ones" make the decision to end it doesn’t seem like a good idea. The younger generation is more likely to view wealthy older people or older people in a 'couple' as being more suited to continue on in this world. Thus, you would have to come up with particular characteristics of what is deemed "healthy and old" in your view before the idea could seriously be considered. As you suggest earlier on, a failing body can go on and on, and the mind with it, if given the right drugs. Re your father: "he's one of the very few babyboomers that accepts his fate". I'm sure most of us know we're going to die, but we arrive at that point of being ready to die at different times. Eg, if a man's life has been his work and his marriage, and at age 74 he is retired and his wife has passed on, then he may well be ready to die. On the other hand, a woman who cared for the family throughout her 'adult' years may have only started to live at midlife, when the young'uns got a life of their own. Lastly, think of all the jobs servicing the old has brought into our society.


LorraineH
said
0 0

In Quebec we need more GPs to ensure patients see the proper specialist at the right time. The GP then receives the report, diagnosis, course of treatment including medications and can ensure there is no conflict between medications.

In Quebec much money is wasted on paying for optional treatments for all such as IVF treatments instead of putting money where it is needed. There is also a limit on the number of students accepted into various medical programs and, upon graduation, they are told where they have to work and how much time they must spend in Hospital Emergency Rooms.

We have a dire shortage of GPs which has resulted in the boomer generation being stuck at clinics or emergency rooms where you see who is on duty. Great for true emergencies but everyone really needs someone who knows them and their situation.

Government needs to look at waste, especially bureaucratic waste, stop trying to pay for everything for everyone and maybe then money will be available for where it is really needed.




Mq
said
0 0

Thumbs down me all you want. This very same idea of cost vs age is being taught in Medical schools around the world. Population control is not simply a myth. Your government does not want you living much beyond your working years. This is fact. There are whole committee's that are in place to discuss this very issue. (Population Control) So go ahead, thumbs down me all you want, the smart one's see beyond their own selfish wants and needs to prolong their parents lives, because YOU cannot deal with THEIR pending deaths! If you made enough money during your life to pay for your life beyond your working days, you will live longer. If you didn't, then you die sooner. It's not rocket science. But then again, we live in Canada, we have zero understanding or respect for healthcare. We live in a little bubble, that will burst very soon because of this very same issue, and our aging population.


Joyce Winterbottom
said
0 0

To Mq:

While i agree with you that we have to be more careful about end-of-life options, your post is flawed.

1. if your dad is 74 he is not a baby boomer.... that generation starts with the post war generation, people who are at most 65 now.

2. Not everyone will be tired of living or in bad health at 74.

3. you don't get to decide who is too old to continue living. Culture, financial status, health, fitness, family, religion all play a role.

We might start reducing health care by offering help so that people to take more responsibility for their health i.e. stop smoking programs, weight loss, exercise programs etc...




island girl
said
0 0

On the other hand, why do we spend millions to save 'unviable' infants: Those born weighing about 2 pounds? These infants nature would have taken, but we interfere, and they have life long disabilities whether or not visible. That costs millions over their lifetime. Many will not earn as much as healthy humans so have no chance to contribute to the tax base like our seniors did. Sounds no more callous than Mq's comment.


Mike
said
0 0

Legalize Medical Pot and tax it. It will relieve mass pressure on the system and will bring in revenue for the government.That's it.


Mq
said
0 0

This may sound being a bit callous. But England has the right idea. They do not cover certain, 'Life prolonging' drugs. The reason being, and its quite simple, we can not as a species afford to keep everyone alive to 90 . At what point do the 'healthy' ones get to say, "Ok listen, you've had your fill of drugs to prolong your life, but now we really must insist you pay or 'survive' on your own merits. I think it is very selfish of the eldest generation to use an already cash strapped system as a means of prolonging, what is in many cases, a failing body due to well beyond the natural life age being prolonged. And before you say anything my 74 year old father and I have had this discussion. He's tired of life thanks to the last 5 years. He's' on 6 different pills, has had 2 critical care surgery's, and flat out told me, hes more sick of people refusing to simply let him die. He's got about 2 years left in him, he knows it, doctors know it, his family knows it. But that's the difference, he's one of the very few baby boomers that accepts his fate. You will die. He unlike many of his truly spoiled generation will not go kicking and screaming to the grave. Why should the children of elders be taxed into the grave so they can continue using a system to prolong their life beyond what they contributed to society. Our 50 's are costing us more in golden age care, then they put into the coffer's during their entire life. Doesn't make much sense.


Leasa
said
0 0

My mother has Guillain Barre Syndrome and we recently chose to bring her home as the only thing the hospital was doing was giving out her meds. Having her home saves the astounding cost of hospitalization, yet the in home services are severely lacking. GBS left her a paraplegic so we do need help. A PSW person only costs just over $13. per hour yet we only get two hours a day in help. Home care can arrange for equipment but it's only free for one month, then the 'rental' costs are crazy, for example they charge $160. per month for a patient lift, a $120. per month for a bed etc. It's been 10 days and we are still waiting for a single visit from a R.N. or physio therapy. Her doctor is unconcerned and is offering no advice or even a phone call to see how she is. So, here we are saving Ontario $1000.'s of health care dollars yet it's like they want to do the easiest thing and simply warehouse her in a hospital. With family, I can say the care she is getting is much better than when she was in hospital, but for sure we could use more support so we can make it long term and help with her recovery. My advice? Don't get sick and don't get old in Ontario.


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Health Stories

Drop the Worry Ball: How to Parent in the Age of Entitlement

Parents must learn to stop meddling, author urges

More   25 Comments 25  

Doctors at St. Michael's hospital in Toronto are using a device that can wash antibodies right out of a person’s blood in hopes of increasing the number of possible kidney donors.

Device could lead to more living kidney donors

More    Comments    1 Video(s) 1

Most Talked about Stories

It is about time - as a grandparent I have watched our kids (who were allowed to fail although I do remember some nagging on our part) learn, I have watched our children now micro-manage their children. A big part of it is the fact that there are predators out there and an extreme reluctance on the parents part to alllow freedom that might result in the children becoming victims.

Harvey

Parents must learn to stop meddling, author urges