THESMANEWS
Present Issue
Past Issues
Journals
Present Issue
Past
Issues
SMA Editorial Board
Letters to the Editor |
This site is supported by
Health ONE
We either slaughter a few ostreperous ones now, and watch them
bleed, or all of us shall bleed later on. There is no such thing as a free
lunch.
NO FREE LUNCH
Introduction
It was Milton Friedman that coined the famous phrase. “There is no
such thing as a free lunch”. Implicit to this statement is that there is
a cost to everything. Health is no exception although some may beg to differ.
Defining and Differentiating “Need” and “Demand”
A surplus or shortage exists because there is an imbalance between
demand and supply. Demand must be differentiated from need. Need necessitates,
demand desires. The most fundamental question here is that are we here
to meet needs or are we here to satisfy desires? Secondary to this question
is, what and who defines what is a need, and what is a desire? Is subsidised
health care available to all (I stress, ALL) a need or a desire? Is being
a hub a need? Is yet another high-technology gadget or another a new department
or polyclinic a need or a desire?
Having decided that perhaps all the above and many other issues and
objects as needs or desires, do we, the medical profession as part of the
health care community, decide whether it is our business to arbitrate between
these needs, desires and the available, albeit insufficient resources?
I believe that needs should be met. Real needs. By whom? That is the
question. Is it by the private sector, the public sector or both? Or maybe,
the health sector should not get involved at all! But some needs will have
to be met by the health sector regardless. Needs of not just the public,
but our internal customers, the health care workers as well.
A Very Demanding Problem
The problem remains at the focal point of demand. Or more precisely,
managing a situation of shortage or surplus that arises out of an imbalance
of demand and supply. The health sector has traditionally managed this
imbalance by usually managing only one side of the supply-demand equation:
the supply side. Let us go through a few examples:
1. Not enough medical officers: increase medical students intake (i.e.
increase supply)
2. Not enough polyclinics: open more
3. Too many people overcrowding A & E departments: open clinics
adjacent to A & E
(provide substitute services)
4. Too many medical officers in civil service (in the past): early
release.
All these are measures designed to regulate the supply of resources.
There is nothing wrong with managing supply. Managing supply is crucial
to addressing shortages and surpluses. But equally important is that of
managing demand. The recent initiative to raise A & E charges is a
step in this direction. Let us hope that a petit allegro will lead to a
grand jete in time to come.
Tackling Demand
Whatever the case may be, it is perhaps time to think more about managing
demand in health care. Especially, the tougher and often unpopular options
of managing demand: denying demand, making demand punitively expensive
and shifting demand elsewhere. This is because the demand for health care
resources is insatiable. We simply cannot just think about relentlessly
increasing supply to meet escalating demand. We will have to modulate demand
itself. Both sides of the demand-supply equation have to be managed just
as intensely. If not, we may then be immured in an insoluble and insolvent
mathematical and economic quagmire.
We Need A Grand Plan
Where so we go from here? First, in addition to tackling demand itself,
there could perhaps be a more integrated approach to managing demand and
supply. First, the question of ”who does what” has to be tackled. If the
money is in performing procedures, then more people will gravitate towards
intervention work. Common sense dictates this is so, as the economically
shrewd will not want to get enmeshed in a monetarily low-yield non-interventional
service. (Please don’t laugh, if defense companies can make roast duck,
nothing is impossible). The management of demand and supply has been somewhat
parochial in outlook so far, with each institution and organisation managing
their own microclimate through gradual attenuation, these efforts being
usually directed at meeting demand. A grand plan is needed. A plan that
provides for the equitable distribution of rewards, not a promenade of
half-hearted efforts.
Money Talks (and Does Much, Much More!)
Next, the question of “how” arises. There are essentially 3 ways to
balance the demand and supply act:
1. Administrative measures
2. Professional measures
3. Financial (funding) measures.
There are now more and more moves to improve professionalism and regulate
the way doctors work. Efforts to increase the supply of doctors and nurses
also fall into this same vein. Administrative measures such as increasing
opening hours of some clinics or opening new clinics next to A & E
departments have also been tried. These are effective measures. But there
really is a limit to what these 2 can achieve. More is needed. We have
to perhaps start relying on the third arm of measures: financial. Let us
go through 2 examples that underlines the power inherent in financial measures:
Pay more to pay less....
If a civil servant can get cheap and non-standard medication from a
SOC with minimal fuss, then he would loath to get it from a polyclinic,
though cheap, comes with a mountain of paperwork, or worse, pay more to
the GP. Perhaps if we raised the claimable amount by a civil servant for
seeing a GP from $10 to $18, we may reduce significantly the workload in
the polyclinics and cut expenditure, bearing in mind that the average cost
of consultation in the polyclinic is more than $19. Nett result: civil
servants go to their GPs for simple ailments like flu and even chronic
conditions such as hypertension if there are not many medications. They
do not wait so long at their GPs, polyclinic workloads and waiting times
also improve. Best of all, it now costs the government $18 instead of $19++
to do the same job. Civil servants probably pay $1 to $2 more for flu,
but nobody should complain....Not when waiting times shorten and consultation
can take place in GP clinics at night, away from productive and precious
office hours.
Pay more and keep paying more....
If a health care institution receives subvention proportional to the
amount of work done, it would hate to discharge patients. Not only is demand
not curbed, there is little incentive to remove inappropriate work. The
commercially enterprising may even look for more work. And when work in
not easy to find, one can always go on a conquest of other territories
and fiefdoms. Revenue caps are effective, but frankly, I never had problems
spending money, I only have had problems earning it. The end-result is
an all enveloping miasma of more and more work, and a growing morass of
more and more subvention. Will DRGs(Diagnosis Related Groups) work? Will
Balance Billing do the job? Nobody can be sure now, but at least we should
agree that financial measures should be considered and tried.
Conclusion
The "how", "who", "what" and even "where" of arbitrating demand and
supply in health care. There should be no scared cows. We either slaughter
a few obstreperous ones now, and watch them bleed, or all of us shall bleed
later on. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
DR WONG CHIANG YIN
.
|