Doctors and Medicare: Worker-System Mismatch?

american sniperMedical students fight to do disgusting procedures. Most people find some parts of doctoring attractive, but other parts look unimaginably repulsive.

Medicine requires unique people. Doctors carry certain assumptions long before they start medical school. Training deepens those ideas and hones new attitudes and behaviour.

Here are some ideas doctors believe about

Work:

  • Hard work pays off.
  • Delayed gratification does too.
  • Risk and sacrifice determines rewards.
  • Reward must be earned.
  • Excellence exists; all workers are not identical.

Knowledge:

  • Knowledge grows and builds on the past.
  • New information should inform current practice.
  • Innovation breaks some rules.
  • We should follow where the evidence leads.

Character:

  • Actions have consequences.
  • Self-reliance – you write your own exams and perform your own lumbar punctures.
  • Confidence – make a decision and act on it even in the face of limited information.
  • Self control – keep emotions in check, be calm in crisis, practice decorum.

Whether by nature or training, all professionals possess a unique bent. Professionals work best in places that presuppose the values and tendencies that contributed to them becoming those professionals in the first place.

Workplace design follows provider function.

Medicare

Politicians designed Medicare to meet political ends, not universal care. The Canadian healthcare monopoly lags far behind other universal healthcare systems (Commonwealth Fund Report). Ideas and values follow the presuppositions of our system so that:

  • Politicians disparage hard work as greed.
  • Academics promote rigid guidelines.
  • Administrators create definitive policies.
  • Regulatory colleges punish rule breaking.
  • Non-medical workers demand respect but defer risk.
  • Risk does not increase reward. Government pays similar fees regardless of age and complexity.
  • Promotions follow seniority, not performance (for non-medical staff).
  • New information matters less than stakeholder influence.
  • Ideology trumps evidence.

Doctors and Medicare

We don’t hire sumo wrestlers as jockeys or morticians as cheerleaders. We want stockbrokers to think and act differently than kindergarten teachers. We hope firemen follow fewer rules than building inspectors.

Every decade politicians and bureaucrats work to reshape Medicare in their own image. Eventually, the system cannot tolerate the professionals it was created to fund.

What do you think? Are doctors square pegs being forced into the round hole of state run healthcare? Do patients need different doctors or a different system?

What Will Doctors Do Next? OMA MOH Negotiations

StevePaikin2010_22Television host, Steve Paikin, spoke with Dr. Ved Tandan, Ontario Medical Association President, about the failed OMA MOH negotiations. Paikin asked what happens when government, the payor, makes unilateral cuts.

Usually when these kinds of things break down, Dr. Tandan, the payee does something like withdraw services; like go to Queen’s Park with lab coats and protest signs and raise hell, etc., etc. What do the doctors have planned now?

Tandan said, “The doctors of Ontario are going to do everything we can to minimize the impacts of these cuts. But make no mistake; there will be negative impacts.

See The Agenda (11:38).

What Next?

A prominent pollster in Ontario told a large group of physicians that doctors need to learn how to play tough. They shouldn’t be so nice.

Ineffective action could be seen as inaction.

Physicians need to think about doctors who are working now, those who will follow, and all their patients. If doctors frame fee cuts as nothing but a personal nuisance, they miss the point. Current cuts drain physician funding for the next 15 years or more.

Time to Recovery

In 2012, doctors took a 5% fee cut. Inflation runs between 1.2-2% per year. The Wynne Liberals sliced off 2.65% this month with more to follow. Wynne promises 4% plus an unknown amount of claw backs as ‘reconciliation’ for growth in services.

5% + (2% x 2 years) +4% = 13%

Doctors will see 17% cuts, or more, to gross billings by 2017 including inflation. Physicians’ net income will drop well over 20%.

A007How long will it take to fees to recover? Even if we assume a 1% recovery per year, plus 2% inflation, it would take 17 years to recover with 3% raises per year, or 2034. How reasonable is it to expect 17 yrs of 3% raises? The core family practice code, A007, has almost flatlined.

 

Response vs. Vision

Doctors took a fairly measured, coordinated response so far. Articles, videos, social media and meetings with politicians offer peaceful protest. Should physicians ramp up their response? Should they march to Queen’s Park?

What do doctors want? They probably want the bottomless pit of reconciliation abolished. Docs likely want the indiscriminate program and fee cuts reversed. But do physicians have a vision for fundamental change?

Without system change, we can expect more cuts and tweaks in the future. Political pilot projects within the current framework will raise expectations and then disappoint with unsustainable costs. Four decades make it certain. Dr. Max Gammon, after studying the British National Health Service, said that in

a bureaucratic system … increase in expenditure will be matched by fall in production ….

It’s called Gammon’s Law, or the Theory of Bureaucratic Displacement.

Some doctors want protest but have little appetite for fundamental change. Protesting current cuts while asking for a return to the status quo prolongs the inevitable. If we protest, we need protest with vision. Are doctors willing to consider substantive system change? Is the public ready for it?

Or should doctors shut up and accept a >20% cut to net income?

photo credit: theagenda.tvo.org

Zero tolerance, Zero Empathy?

zero tolerance signHospitals and government services like to put large posters up that list all the things they do not tolerate.

  • Abusive language
  • Acts of violence
  • Inappropriate behaviour
  • Harassment
  • Bullying
  • Yelling
  • Profanity
  • Verbal threats

Zero tolerance seems a good solution for all kinds of social problems. Whenever anyone wants to say they really don’t support something, they say they have a zero tolerance approach. Here are some example from the headlines:

Hospital leadership adopts zero tolerance policies to support staff. Policies plus proper doors, panic buttons and modern approaches to security best practices help protect an organization’s most valuable asset.

But for some, zero tolerance means zero empathy.  That angers patients.  Upset patients act poorly and make staff feel unsafe. Staff cry out for stronger zero tolerance, and the cycle continues.

Should professionals, trained at managing the emotions of all kinds of emergency situations, need to have giant posters telling patients what they will not tolerate? Is there a chance that zero tolerance promotes callous and pitiless treatment of patients?

In schools, zero tolerance fosters the opposite approach that behavioural concerns require. In Kicking the Nasty Habit of Zero Tolerance, Julia Steiny reports that some teachers say:

I teach the good kids.  I don’t give the bad kids the time of day.  They shouldn’t be here.

When students need to hear:

I care about you.  It is my job, if for no other reason, to invest in your success…

A recent article in Nursing Times suggests the same thing: Do Zero Tolerance Policies Deskill Nurses? Zero tolerance policies assume that dealing with aggression is not part of a healthcare professional’s job.

Zero Tolerance For Staff?

Instead of advertising what we won’t tolerate from patients, why don’t hospitals advertise what patients won’t have to tolerate from staff? Why don’t we adopt a zero tolerance for staff and post that on huge posters in hospital waiting rooms? We could adopt zero tolerance for

  • Staff talking about vacations while ignoring new patients
  • Sneering skepticism
  • Snide remarks and innuendo
  • Condescension
  • Patronizing remarks
  • Unnecessary delays
  • Being bothered by interruptions
  • Abandoning patients to go on breaks
  • Profanity
  • Anger

The worst of zero tolerance attitude tends to seep in and change culture. It takes huge effort to maintain excellence, teamwork and a positive attitude . Ignore excellent behaviour for just a short time and culture risks becoming callous, pitiless, dismissive and cruel.

Healthcare requires professionals trained to handle patients at their worst. Even nice, polite, otherwise normal people can scream and swear when in unbearable pain. Professionals know this. Professionals pay attention to safety, but then they manage bad behaviour with grace and magnanimity.  Zero tolerance posters should be beneath them.

[photo credit: amazon.com]