Obvious but not Easy
The budgets provided to Nova Scotia’s Health Authorities in recent years have contained almost no increases even though they are subject to considerable pressures from inflation, aging demographics, and the constant demand for new and expensive treatments. This emphasizes the reality that the public purse is not going to pay for treating every ailment, and the treatments that it does provide will continue to be rationed. Perhaps this will allow health care leaders to more publicly acknowledge the challenge that they face: choosing which maladies to treat and doing so as cost effectively as possible.
It is with this backdrop that Capital health will on June 28th be hosting “A Conversation About Technology as a Catalyst for Transforming Health Care.” No doubt there are many excellent ideas emerging as creative minds develop new tools and techniques. But there is considerable opportunity for improvement available from very familiar existing technologies.
Consider the way that appointments for diagnostic tests or specialist visits are typically arranged. The referring physician having decided that an appointment is needed, his office makes contact by phone or, more frequently, by fax . Then the patient finds out about the appointment by mail , if the post office is not on strike and the patient is not out of town. The patient is often not made aware why the test or visit is being done. If the date and time are not possible for the patient the whole cycle has to be repeated. Actually getting the work done happens weeks or months after the need for it was determined.
This is almost laughably inefficient in an era when large crowds can in a few hours be summoned to demonstrate in Tahrir square for democracy or to clean streets in Vancouver, when Masai cattle herders in Kenya pay their bills with cellphones, or when call centers in India guide aging boomers in fixing their computer problems. The opportunity to reduce frustration while saving time and money by using elementary internet tools is obvious.
There are obstacles, although the hurdles are rather low:
- Because the internet is vulnerable to hackers there are potential risks to patient privacy. But other professions, perhaps most notably lawyers, have overcome this problem. It is likely that most patients, given the chance , would gladly take the risk. In any event the problem has already been faced in areas such as Alberta that employ electronic medical records, a much more ambitious undertaking than what is proposed here.
- There is at present no mechanism for physicians to get paid for informing patients via email. Would it not save the system money , and aid physician productivity, if they could receive some fraction of what they receive for an office visit?
- Sometimes the physician can pick up important information during incidental conversations. Fair enough , but an email to explain why a test is being done is better than no communication at all. And incidental conversations can also take place electronically.
- Some physicians might have to make small investments in new technology.
Getting this to work well requires very little systems work. (But easy extensions of the idea are obvious. For example a patient email reply acknowledging the appointment; an automated reminder email to the patient the day before including a boarding pass look alike that could save time at registration; an automated note to the patient confirming that results had been forwarded to the family physician).
Saving money on administration will be good for patients because it will free up scarce funds for care giving. Yet one suspects that this topic will not easily find its way into the discussions on June 28:
- This is not a topic that can be addressed by physicians and other care givers on their own. In fact much of the work has to be done by lawyers, policy makers, and information systems experts.
- Instead of involving new ideas and technologies, which are fun, this involves administration, which is tedious.
- This will require real change on the way things are done , which is hard. Using email instead of fax will have to be encouraged, then incented, then required over a multi-year transition. It will take more than gentle coaxing to implement change. Government policymakers will need to provide support for the transition but also to become progressively more insistent.
Such a development, which has already happened in other provinces and would clearly benefit patients, can only occur if it is energized by thought leaders in the Health Care System.
Appendix A
Source: Government of Nova Scotia – Estates and Supplementary Detail


Most Recent Comments
-
-
-
View all commentsI’m 67 and worked 6 yrs for a multinational, then 32 for the Federal Govt., always in accounting, so I believe understand the mentality of the bureaucrats at every level. Wonder whether I will live long enough to hear a politician in this country that understands what is wrong with our Government funded service programs and is brave enough to stand up and say it out loud for as long as it takes? IT’S COMPETITION WE NEED and PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STEP ASIDE! And I am not taking about the current competition for Govt. grants that is so prevalent here in N.S. today.
The following anecdote received today from a friend really drives the message home for me at least:
Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require a hip replacement.
The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and has a time booked for surgery the following week.
The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn’t reviewed for another week and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then.
Why the different treatment for the two patients?
The FIRST is a Golden Retriever.
The SECOND is a Senior Citizen.
Donald M Hall | October 3, 2011
The doctors don’t seem to like to work within a team format with other health professionals supporting.
Nurse practitioners, Social Workers, pharmacists, etc.
Team members can do much of the work with the doctors focusiing on their particular area of expertise.
Perhaps they make more money doing it all themselves.
Peter McCurdy | June 25, 2011
Bill: Good read but I disagree on principle that physicians have to be incented to send an email. If we were serious about better communication we would mandate it. The key question is “if one was inventing a medical delivery system, would it look like the one we have now”? The answer is no, but we have these “interested groups, like doctors and nurses who have a great deal at stake by keeping supply of this specialized labour low so those inside the loop continue to be paid at the highest rates.
Even the unionized sublayers like cleaning are protected by being the exclusive suppliers of labour and therefore, society pays more, much more than in a compettive private sector. Society is hobbled by the forces of status quo, those who are supplying services demand more and resist any change.
The only glimer of hope has been Scotia Surgery but I fear that this government will suffocate this program soon.
Change in this closed system is next to impossible until the payor runs out of money and payee knows that change is a must if they want to get paid. I would suggest we declare such a state sooner than later and get to the pickin’s.
Wayne
Wayne Fiander | June 24, 2011