Making Canadian Health Care Stronger

Time is wasted. Doctors and nurses do not have time to get a clear understanding of patients’ health issues. The result? Too many unnecessary doctor visits...Canadian patient

The Health Council of Canada’s goal - one shared by Canada’s governments and the overwhelming majority of Canadians - is a high-quality and sustainable public health care system for all. Is this achievable? Yes, in the Health Council’s view.

In 2008, total public and private spending on health care across Canada reached $172 billion a year, an average of over $5,000 per person. This spending is growing faster than Canada’s economy, outpacing inflation and population growth.

What we need is to examine and confirm what we want the system to achieve.

This initiative is about looking at our health care system through a value for money lens.

Value for Money requires knowing what our goals are, since they represent what we value and require us to define specific objectives. Value for Money also means being able to measure what resources went into achieving those objectives, and on being able to measure the outcomes of care.

So a value-for-money perspective dictates that we ask at least two fundamental questions:

Are we using resources well to produce services ?

Are we using services well to produce better health ?

figure 6

What do we value from our system?

Canadians value many aspects of health care. It can contribute to good health and a good quality of life. We value the system’s role in comforting and caring for people when they are in poor health.

Beyond technical outcomes, we should also include social values that are not easily quantified, such as compassion and fairness. For example, how do we act compassionately when expenses are extreme?

Canadians don’t need to spend vastly more, but we do need to spend smarter.

We’re spending roughly 10% of our GDP on health care, more than many other developing countries, but are we buying our way to longer life? The U.S., for example, spends much more but Americans live several years less than we do, on average.

Why?

figure 4

To answer these and more questions about value for money:

• We need better information. Assessing value for money requires knowing what care is effective, for whom, and under what circumstances; and finding out whether that care actually has the desired effects. For example, are we using resources well when we see a specialist instead of a family doctor? Or when we use a doctor instead of a nurse or nutritionist?

More health care is not always better, for individuals or for populations.

• Because of the increase in paperwork, we see fewer clients.  I find it unintelligent and a waste of taxpayers’ money.  The client/patient pays the price ultimately for poor planning...Canadian health care provider

  Sometimes more care or newer services do not produce better health, but are more expensive. Sometimes it’s possible to spend less - by using less expensive drugs or technology, or by choosing not to operate - and produce at least equal if not better outcomes.

• Contrary to popular belief, aging and population growth are not the major causes of the rise in Canada’s health care spending. The largest factor is our increasing use of services. On average, we are all getting more care. Are we healthier as a result?

• Despite having a relatively low number of doctors and a slightly higher than average number of nurses for the size our population, Canada does well on the measure of avoidable mortality – a measure of deaths that could have been prevented by high-quality care. In contrast, the UK has about the same number of doctors and nurses for its population as Canada does, but the UK experiences many more deaths that could be prevented through timely and effective health care.

figure 9(A)

figure 9(B)

Read the Report

"Value for Money: Making Canadian Health Care Stronger"

click on the above link to read the report