Textbook Flashcards
safe injection sites
- harm reduction
harm reduction: reduce harmful consequence assoc w illicit drug use other high risk activities for ppl unable/unwilling to stop.
safe injection sites: pros + cons
pro: health + social benefits. gateway to medical + social services. cleaner practice = lower blood-borne disease = save lives + fewer hc costs to treat those conditions. encourage treatment programs.
con: illicit drug use by sanitizing +legitimizing.
- decriminaliing
delisting sex reassignment
provinces delist then re-instate. feds delist for incarcerated.
medically necessary deemed how?
condition, whether condition is severe enough to impinge significanlty upon quality of life, jeopardize psycho-social functioning + if med treatment will ameliorate condition.
risk-benefit ratio.
post-retrenchment in 1998 what happened?
demand for wage increase, competition btw provinces, nurse shortage = health care costs increased rapidly.
hc in 2001 - what trends in hospital vs outpatient, data, etc
fewer beds in line with other countries. more outpatient.
provinces gain control of cost - data helps funding be allocated of projection rather than physician-directed.
data - help manage performance of system.
CHST - effects on provinces
canada health + social transfer.
- fedreduced amount of money to province, allowed them to spend money however they want. annual increase removed, funding will change year-to-year. hard for province to plan for future needs when dunno money comign in.
CHST: what actually happened?
fed got deficits under control + gave one-time contribtions to provicnes.
launched period of steady growth.
paul martin + CHST
split cht and cst.
= more transparent by ID-ing money specific to health care vs social
= annual increase reinstated. 6% annual increase until 2014.
- fed establish program of national important: Wait time reductin fund. set aside money for provinces to use to reduce wait times.
what 5 areas did wait time reduction fund focus on ?
cancer treatment, heart procedures, disagnostic imaging, joint replacement, eye restoration.
Harper in 2011, renegotiations for funding post-2016
annual increase would be tied to economic growth. never fall below 3%. distributing funds on per capita basis rather than disproportionately transferring to poorer provinces.
- no national goals funding
- no negotiations.
- hands-off approach of fed govt to hc.
- innovation and improvement is province own issue to deal with.s
implication of no national goals
data on hc performance btw provinces no longer comparable bc independent innovations
distn of expenditure of hc
shift from hospital (45% to 29.1%) to outpatient.
physician expenditure 15% - 13.6%. rank slipping. hosptial + drug take more expenditure.
drug expenditure increased from 6% (1975) to 16% in 2009.
issue in shifting expenditures?
public vs private.
public services through provincial health insurance plans or private, out-of pocket and maybe reimbursed by commercial for-profit insurance. shift into privitization of hc.
are we moving to privitization?
public takes 70 % cost whereas private takes 30%. mainly for hosptial, physician + public health tho. for drugs, dentist chiro etc. more private money than public.
public reinvestment in other areas to pick up costs.
quebec, SCC what the ruling meant?
narrowly decided that no privaate is unconstitutional.
allowed quebec to have private parallel to public.
rules to private being parallel to public
guaranteed wait time for procedure + docs who move to private must completely opt out of public hc
why do docs have to opt of of public if moving to private?
remove incentive for docs operating in public to increase wait times to persuade public to pay higher fee for rapid service in private system.
define rationing of health care
any mechanism that allows ppl to go without beneficial health care services
why is rationing health care issue
suggests that withholding hc will have tragic consequence for health + well-being
emmet hall + Hc
discussed consequences to Canadians when fed govt chose not to proceed with recommendation that pharmaceuticals and home care be covered under provincial health insurance.
implication of presentation that HC system in crisis
groups with vested interests argue for crisis.
- no evidence that cant afford hc system. suggests crisis is politically constructed
- not without blemish tho
what are eclectics?
practiced form of botanical medicine in North America for nearly 200 years, involve complex combination of plant extracts to treat illness
emmett hall with SC, royal commission on health ervices. evaluating existing and future needs for health services
used other countries for reference on how to improve.
- recommend sask model all over canada
- recommend perscription meds, prosthetics + home care insured.
- dental + optometry services provided for children + welfare recipients
two purposes of canada health act.
- harmonize medical care act and hospital and diagnostic ervices act. harmonize
- address problems that emerged in provincial hc ie extra-billing, user fees.
define first-dollar coverage
third party payer assumes liability for covered services as soon as first dllar of expense for service is incurred.
convergence hypothesis
thesis that health care systems become increasingy similar over time because of similar scientific, technological, economic, and epidemiological pressures
elements of convergence hypothesis
- docs seek most current med tech + knowledge to improve service + increase income/prestige.
a. globalization allows expanded access to knowledge - economic pressures. cost of hc eventually leads govt to reduce costs. capitalist restrict market in hc. socialist encourage market in hc.
a. move towards middle ground. market plays role but restricted by state. - demographic. aging poplns = more NCF. more interest in patient satisfaction + choice.
when can cross national comparison be misleading? two types of errors
naive transplantation: assumed idea in 1 coutnry can be adopted successfully w same + results in other country
- fallacy of comparative difference: assumption coutnries have nothing to learn from one another simply bc differ in hc systems in 1+ dimensions.
right to health care - against perspective
- autonomy + individualism, stressing right son individuals.
- implictly assert that hc workers have duty to provide care. restrict rights of hc workers to control their time + resources.
- implicitly obligate all members of society to pay costs of care
- can’t take responsibility for correcting all inequalities caused by biological and social differences in future.
- if give right to hc, dont u have to give right to education, transportation, housing?
right to health care - for perspective
social justice
- reject distinction between unfortunate and unfair circumstances.
- reject that hc is privilege, dependent on charity or benevolence.
- individual has right to at least minimum hc.
society is interdependent. docs get tax support funding, if accept, they give back through hc they provide
-purchase hc is hardly a choice when have to give up things for it.
- cant do it all, but do something
canada vs US doctor visits
US - wealthy more visits than poor. distributed based on wealth.
Canada - poor more visits than wealthy. ditributed based on need
income and survivability: can vs US
US: significant assoc btw income + survival. no assoc found in Canada
equity is desirable, but has opposition
conflict w interests of those w most power in society.
-graduated taxation: more proportionally from young, healthy, rich, pay for old, ill + poor.
equity opposed if spreading resources equally means?
neither immediate service nor every service they want.
- wealthy incur out-of-pocket expense to receive things they want in timely fashion