FINANCIAL POST COLUMN: Help Canadian Patients by Copying an EU Surgery Practice

EU FP Column

If provincial governments copied a health care policy from Europe, they could immediately help thousands of Canadian patients who are suffering.

Passed in 2011, the European Union’s (EU) “cross border directive” takes power out of health bureaucrats’ hands and instead puts patients in the driver’s seat. EU patients facing a long wait list for a procedure can travel to another EU country, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home country for the bill. Reimbursements cover up to the cost of what the government would have paid to have the procedure done locally.

Importing the EU’s policy approach to Canada could bring immediate pain relief for many desperate patients. A couple of years ago, B.C. patient Jenny Mckenzie described to SecondStreet.org what life was like on a waiting list. Her hip pain was so severe that just walking across her living room became quite difficult. The government’s slow health care system also robbed Jenny of precious time with her grandkids: babysitting hyper-mobile kids was simply out of the question. While she waited for surgery she couldn’t travel, exercise or even meet her friends for coffee.

Other patients have described having suicidal thoughts as they languished on government waiting lists and struggled to cope with chronic pain. A retired nursing professor who conducted academic research into patient suffering once described to SecondStreet.org how an Alberta patient had his surgery cancelled, as his year-long wait for the procedure required taking painkillers and the narcotics had damaged his liver to such an extent he no longer qualified for surgery.

Data obtained by SecondStreet.org showed 11,581 patients died in Canada in 2020-21 while waiting for governments to get around to providing surgery. Most appeared to have died while waiting for procedures that could have improved their quality of life, such as a hip operation. But there were also many cases where patients died while waiting for surgery that might have saved their life, such as a heart operation.

If provincial governments provided financial support for Canadians to receive surgery abroad or in other provinces, thousands of patients could receive the care they need in a timely manner. Grandparents could get back to enjoying their retirement years and spending time with their grandkids. Parents could return to work and get their lives back on track. Who knows? Some patients’ lives might even be saved.

To be clear, there could be cases where a patient has to pay the difference between the amount their government reimbursed and the cost of surgery by a health provider outside of Canada. However, the reverse is also possible. For instance, Manitoba patient Max Johnson indicated in late 2021 that his knee surgery in Lithuania cost far less than the Manitoba government typically spent on the procedure.

Copying the EU’s approach would also help patients who didn’t travel abroad but remained on government waiting lists for surgery. Every time someone ahead of them in line left the public system’s waiting list and traveled abroad, everyone on the list would move up a spot.

Provincial governments do sometimes cover the cost of planned surgery provided to Canadian patients in other countries. But the key word is “sometimes.” While this recourse is rare in Canada, in the EU in 2019 84 per cent of applications for reimbursement were approved. Overall, 243,655 patients either had their reimbursement request approved up front or after the patient paid for surgery. Canadian patients would clearly benefit if Canada also routinely approved reimbursements.

Perhaps the best aspect of this policy is its cost, which is minimal. It doesn’t really increase costs but instead shifts when the expense occurs. Instead of the government paying for a patient’s surgery next year, it pays the bill now. Thus, over time the cost balances out.

Travelling abroad for surgery is not exactly convenient; nor is having to front money for surgery. But Canada’s system is in crisis. Too many patients are suffering. We need to think outside business as usual. Governments have grown far too comfortable with long health-care waiting lists. Patients deserve a new approach, one that puts them in the driver’s seat.

Colin Craig is president of SecondStreet.org, a Canadian think-tank.

This column was published by the Financial Post on July 27, 2022.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.