Politics – Page 2 – justanoldcountrydoctor

Unrelenting Bureaucracy is Killing Health Care (and Canada)

Canadians are currently dealing with the dizzying spectacle of Donald Trump’s tariffs against our country. On again? Off again? Delayed? Doubling? I’ve personally gotten seasick trying to keep up with whatever tangerine Palpatine is thinking.

U.S. President Donald Trump – aka the Tangerine Palpatine

However Canada’s response to this (and the nonsense about us becoming the 51st state) has frankly been quite lacking. Yes, it’s great to see Canadians being able to fly the flag with pride, especially after the miserable co-opting of the Canadian flag by the freedom convoy types, who likely themselves were Donald Trump supporters. (How’s that working out for you guys now?) Yes #elbowsupCanada is a wonderful approach to take and a great mantra going forward, particularly with how intertwined hockey is with our nation. (Quick reminder: Not only do we win Olympics, we win Four Nations Cups as well).

BUT, for all the outcropping of (absolutely warranted) national pride – our governments – outside of launching retaliatory tariffs, haven’t done anything to fix the systemic problems in our economy. For example, getting rid of domestic trade barriers and having free trade between provinces would provide a boost of up to $200 billion dollars to our economy, but seemingly no action on this yet.

Even more importantly and what’s long overdue, is an absolutely necessary look at the bureaucracy and impediments that many businesses face in trying to contribute to our economy. Let me talk about a personal experience (and no disrespect intended to the good people on staff in my township).

About 10 years ago, our community had clearly outgrown the medical centre. Some poor sap was put in charge of expanding it. (Guess who.) I had to deal a myriad of problems of putting an addition on our medical centre. Here’s a couple of examples of what I dealt with.

As per policy, the township requested that we provide an engineered site plan. The reason for this was to assess water drainage requirements. While on the surface this makes sense, all the engineered site plan was going to tell us what size of culvert to put on our property for water drainage. The estimate for the site plan was about $15,000.

A sad, lonely culvert, passing its life away draining water…

However, it turns out there were only two sizes of commercial culverts for our project. A big one and a small one. The big one cost $500 more than the small one. Being well-versed in the obstinacy of Ontario Health’s bureaucrats, but somewhat naive in the inflexibility of municipal bureaucrats, I offered to simply put in the bigger culvert right from the start in exchange for waving the engineered site plan.

Those discussions went as well as my less naive readers will expect. The site plan wound up costing $17,000, and it told us that we had to put in the big culvert.

Want more? The township requested a $250,000 letter of credit or certified cheque prior to approving the expansion of the building. My initial reaction was somewhat negative to this request, but upon reflecting, I did realize that it made sense. The request was put in place in case a builder started a project, ran out of money before they finished the project, and left a hole in the ground. The money would then be used to pay to clean up the mess they made.

I still grumbled about the fact that the township was making long term doctors who were clearly invested in the community do this, but I have to concede that it was fair.

The bank informed me there’s some complex fee formula for a letter of credit – and it would have cost $5,000. I asked them for a certified cheque, and it turns out banks don’t do that anymore. However, they were willing to issue a bank draft and the fee for that was $50. Obviously, I got the bank draft instead.

When I went to the planning office however, I was told this was unsuitable. The contract we signed specifically asked for a Letter of Credit or Certified Cheque and I had presented neither. Therefore we had not met the terms of our contract and the project would come to a halt. The staff person did offer to take this to the planning committee, and six weeks later they decided this was ok.

Is this me just griping? Nope – in fact his is happening all through health care and businesses in Canada. I recently spoke to the owner of a Nursing Home. His home had been approved on a “fast track” for a new build based on the dire shortage of nursing home beds in Ontario. I asked when the facility would be built and he just laughed. Apparently “fast track” means that there will “only” be 30 months of paper work (!) before the shovels go in the ground and he hopes it will be completed in 5-6 years!! I’m guessing this “fast track” must be on Toronto’s Eglinton LRT line….

A sad, lonely train on Toronto’s much, much, much delayed Eglinton LRT line

Want more? Just look at the saga of my local hospital, the Collingwood General and Marine. We’ve known for almost two decades that it’s far too small for the community. Heck the community has been asking for a new hospital since the early 2010s and finally got approval on phase 1 (of 5) in 2016. And 9 years later (!) we are at phase 3. The “hope” is that the new building will open its doors in 2032 – 16 YEARS after it was absolutely clear a new hospital was needed immediately.

This problem is not restricted to the health care sector of course. The Financial Post had a piece in 2019 (!) about how these rules are affecting multiple industries. Not only are we not building critical infrastructure in a timely manner because of an inability to cut the bureaucratic bloat, but it’s stifling private businesses as well. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce pointed out that the “ease” of doing business has gone from fourth in the world in 2006 to 53rd now, and this impedes economic growth and investment.

New Prime Minister Mark Carney is off to Europe this week to build trade and strengthen relations. Nothing wrong with that, we need reliable trade partners in the future. BUT, we face an unhinged, hyper volatile situation with our neighbours to the south RIGHT NOW. It seems to me there is no better time than now to drop intra Provincial trade Barriers and right size the bureaucracy allowing for businesses to grow and thrive more easily in Canada. As for health care, the right time was 10 years ago.

Health Care in the Ontario Election: Lots of Sound Bites, No Strong Policy

Last week, I had the opportunity to talk to Greg Brady, on his 640 am radio show, Toronto Today. The episode is on Spotify and, if you are in need of a great cure for insomnia, you can catch me starting from about the 19:30 mark:

Six and half minutes is not enough time to discuss health care in Ontario. Neither is a 1,000 word blog, but that won’t stop me from trying to expand on some of my thoughts.

The first and most prevalent thought I have is disappointment in ALL of the political parties for how they have addressed health care so far. Everyone on the front lines of health care has known for a least a decade that we need bold transformative changes in how health care is run and delivered in Ontario. Probably all of Canada.

And yet, the four would be Premiers all fail to outline a plan for such transformation. Instead, they have all resorted to that age old political vote grabbing stunt of saying “Let’s just throw more money at the problem” without actually reminding you that the money is going to come from YOUR pockets and is going to be, frankly, poorly spent.

The Conservatives hired Dr. Jane Philpott to oversee a spend of $1.8 billion in a plan to connect everyone with a “primary care provider” in the next few years. As I’ve written before, that plan, through no fault of Dr. Philpott, who I have a great deal of respect for, is doomed to failure.

The Conservatives did not start the downfall of family practice in Ontario (that was the miserable Eric Hoskins/Bob Bell duo during the wretched Kathleen Wynne years). But they sure haven’t done enough to fix the mess they inherited. Economist Boris Kralj, PhD, recently showed in the Medical Post that Ontario lost 238 family physicians in 2022/23 – the biggest loss of any province.

The Liberals for their part want to spend 3.1 Billion dollars. At least they promise everyone a family doctor and not a “provider” (and yes, there IS a difference, a BIG one between the two). However, their plan amounts to spending $1.3 billion more than the Conservatives. Spending more without changing things seems naive at best.

The NDP promise to recruit 3,500 more doctors, promise family doctors for everyone, cut red tape, establish a “Northern Command Centre” for health care (that’s actually a good idea) – all for the low low price of only $4.1 Billion dollars, a billion more than the Liberals.

The Green Party promises are actually the most detailed I could see, including lots of goodies, like recruiting more doctors, building more nursing homes, increasing nursing student spots, hiring 6,800 personal support workers and more. There is only one thing missing from the proposal (at least on their website). How much this will all cost YOU, the taxpayer.

Ontario spends $81 billion in taxpayers dollars on health care. Rather than look to see if that money is being spent wisely, and looking to transform health care, all the political parties are simply giving us sound bites. They promise to spend $83-$85 billion on the same failing system, without looking at changing things. Because spending more inefficiently will surely fix things.

OK Smart Guy – What do YOU Think Should Be Done?

Glad you asked dear reader, glad you asked. At an absolute minimum I’m looking for a party that has the political courage and wisdom to do the following three things.

First, A complete hiring freeze on all bureaucrats in health care, including not replacing those who retire, or leave for other reasons.

Currently Ontario has 10 times as many health care bureaucrats per capita as Germany. That’s too many. This means that any meaningful suggestions for change have to go through so many bureaucrats that the whole system is plagued with paralysis by analysis. Time to trim the fat.

Second, ensuring one, and only one, patient app that every resident of Ontario has, which will have access to all their health care data, and allow them to share this with the health care specialist or facility of their choice

Ontario is a digital health nightmare. Your health information often times can’t be shared if you go from one hospital to another, or one doctor to another. There are multiple inefficiencies and unnecessary repeat tests because of this mess and it should never have been allowed to occur.

It would be too expensive and too time consuming to force every health care facility to use the same electronic medical records system. What can be done however, is to force all the systems to integrate with ONE patient app. This will ensure a common standard, and moreover will allow a hospital you happen to be in, to access your out patient information (with your permission) which just doesn’t happen now.

Third, ensuring strong family physician representation at the board level of the Ontario Health Teams.

There is a lot of talk about the benefits of team based care. As someone who views one of his proudest achievements to be the founding Chair of the Georgian Bay Family Health Team, I would agree with this. The current plan for Ontario Health Teams does have merit. BUT, in order for these teams to succeed, they need strong family physician leadership at the GOVERNANCE level. That’s right, you need to put doctors (and more than just a token one) on the Boards of these teams and ensure the teams are led by them – for best clinical outcomes. I don’t see that in the plans.

Final Thoughts

My usual followers will know that I generally vote on the conservative side of the political spectrum (de gustibus non est disputandum). However, I’ve been frankly disappointed that the current Conservative government has been anything but conservative. Sadly, the other parties are really not offering the kind of transformative solutions we need in health care either. I firmly believe that we should all vote in elections, and I certainly will, but for now, call me an undecided old country doctor.

Re-Post: Hoskins Won’t Survive The Mess He’s Made Of Ontario Health Care

NB. The following is a re-print of a blog I wrote for the Huffington Post, published originally on July 10, 2017. It’s being republished here mostly for my own record keeping.

Recently, one of my medical school classmates (now a cardiologist) was awarded the Society of Thoracic Surgeons top rating for patient care outcomes. A great honour for her, and well deserved. Unfortunately for the rest of us, she practices in South Dakota, one of the many physicians who left Ontario during the protracted battles with Ontario Governments in the 1990s.

Back then, as I mentioned in my first blog, many health ministers continued to insist that physicians in Ontario were the highest paid in all of North America. Yet we lost physicians in droves. The reality is that while physicians wanted to be paid a fair wage (who doesn’t?), what they really wanted was to have a say in how health care was delivered and be able to advocate for their patients.

So when the then Ontario government of Bob “Super Elite” Rae made unilateral decisions about health care, physicians left for jurisdictions where they were paid less (according to then Health Ministers Frances Lankin and Ruth Grier). But at least they had a say in how health care was delivered.

I mention this because it appears that current Ontario Health Minister “Unilateral Eric”Hoskins and his Deputy Health Minister Bob Bell have been unable to grasp this fundamental concept. Hoskins (and, to a lesser extent, Bell) have based their whole political strategy on portraying the dispute in the media as one of doctors wanting endless sums of money. If only the doctors would take less, the health-care system would improve. They appear unable to grasp the fact that doctors VALUE the ability to advocate for their patients and contribute to health care decision making.

From a purely political point of view, the strategy had some benefits for Hoskins and Bell. They were able to pass both the Patients First Act and the Protecting Patients Act. There was muted public response because they were able to portray physician opposition to these Acts as physicians protecting their incomes. The fact that the Patients First Act does nothing but increase bureaucracy and that the Protecting Patients Act actually violates Charter Rights of all health-care workers, and will likely be the focus of a Charter challenge, meant nothing to Hoskins and Bell. Good PR in the face of mounting, repeated, ongoing evidence of the collapsing health-care system was all they wanted.

Surely the Hoskins/Bell duo thought their troubles were behind them when the OMA ratified the BA framework. Not so.

It must therefore have come as a shock to Hoskins and Bell when, after giving Physicians Binding Arbitration (BA), physicians actually increased their attacks on the Liberal Government mismanagement of the health-care system. Now to be clear, giving BA is not the same as awarding a contract. The Ontario Medical Association still has to negotiate a contract for physicians.

But central to Hoskins and Bell’s way of thinking was that all physicians cared about is money. And the spectre of BA does force both parties to negotiate fairly.

Also in fairness, it’s pretty evident that Hoskins himself didn’t want to give physicians BA. Not only did he deride physicians for asking for it and fight it in cabinet, but when the Ontario government sent a press release indicating they want to return to negotiations with the OMA with the first order of business being to develop a BA framework, it came from the premier’s office, not Hoskins’ office.

Regardless, surely the Hoskins/Bell duo thought their troubles were behind them when the OMA ratified the BA framework. Not so.

Wait Time Series: Cataract surgery patients are finding themselves on longer #waitlists as funding fails to meet demand in Ontario. #ONpoli pic.twitter.com/Nh466RND1k

— Ont. Medical Assoc. (@OntariosDoctors) July 5, 2017

Since then, the OMA has become even more aggressive in its attacks on the Liberals. Have a look at their Twitter feed where they attack wait times for cataract surgery and joint replacement surgery.

Also, a grassroots group of doctors have now begun tweeting multiple barbs at the Liberals. Saying that doctors are required to put the pieces of health care together, they’ve used inventive and creative images to drive home the point that the Liberals don’t know what they are doing in health care.

Finally, OMA President Dr. Shawn Whatley openly wrote in his blog that physicians need to be champions, not doormats, and fight for health care for their patients. Surely poor Hoskins and Bell never expected this when they actually gave the OMA a path to a fair contract via BA. Goes to show you just how much they misjudged physicians’ desire to advocate for their patients and for a fair health-care system for all of us.

Hoskins and Bell are now, as the old joke goes, officially “post turtles.” This joke compares a (usually inept) politician to a turtle balancing on a fence post. You know he didn’t get there by himself, he doesn’t belong there, he doesn’t know what to do while he’s up there, and you just want to help the poor thing get off the post.

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne basically has little choice now. Hoskins and Bell are just too easy targets for the mess that they’ve made of health care and the way they’ve badly misread physicians passion for protecting their patients. The differences are irreconcilable.

Hoskins is the easier of the two to deal with. Wynne needs to shuffle her cabinet and move Hoskins on to minister of sanitation or something.

Bell, being an employee, has certain rights and can’t just be fired. However, the anonymous surveys done by Quantum Transformation Technologies indicating how unhappy his own bureaucrats are should be enough evidence for Wynne to order a formal administrative review of the senior management team at the ministry of health. Maybe they can be salvaged with administrative coaching.

But what’s clear is that as the health system fails, Wynne needs front line physicians to help put its pieces back together. Wynne needs to regain their trust. The way to do that is to bring tangible change to the leadership of the ministry of health.

OMA Board Betrays Members By Latest Action and This Changes My Vote

OMA Elections period has opened. A chance for members to have a say in how the organization is run and what strategic direction it should take .

After my last couple of missives on OMA Elections, I was going to leave this alone and see what transpired. However, when I went to vote, I noticed a curious thing. None of the non-physician Board candidates were up for re-election. This sent up a red flag. There are three non-physician Board Directors – and every year, as members we have to vote for either one or two of them (the terms are staggered).

If one looks at the OMA website, this little nugget is hidden away in the depths of the Elections FAQ page, a page that I suspect extremely few members would access, much less be aware of:

“…In the case where the director holds a non-physician position and is interested in serving an additional term, the director would be presented to the membership as a re-appointed director…”

There are some conditions the sitting non-Physician Board Directors have to meet, but the blunt reality is that the OMA has taken away the right and ability of Members to vote for these 3 positions if those Directors want another term. This represents 27% of the Board (11 positions total) – which is frankly a large block of votes and can sway a close vote at the Board.

Worse is the vagueness of what is written for IF there was a vacancy. There are a number of requirements for running for the Board for these candidates – all of which are appropriate – however the very last sentence simply states:

“Shortlisted candidates will go through detailed vetting by Promeus Inc., including reference checks, police record checks and social media checks.”

Nowhere does it clearly state that in the event of a vacancy – there would be an election for the non-physician Board Directors. Perhaps this is still the case – however not mentioning it definitively in writing suggests the possibility that this may change.

I was on the OMA board when the governance changes took effect. I supported the overall thrust of them (still do). One of the issues when discussing non-Physician Board Directors was a concern expressed that the type of candidates that might help the OMA out would not want to run in an election. Apparently, these candidates would be “used” to being recruited and simply expected to be given a job.

I personally thought that was silly. If you’re a strong person, have a sense of self-worth, and are confident in yourself, you should be willing to run in an election. You might lose but that’s life (I’ve lost elections). But the personal integrity to run is essential. If the OMA is to represent members, then the members must have the right to vote for all Board Directors. Up until now, that’s what was happening.

Perhaps some non-Physician Directors are thinking “if I was on another board, they’d simply appoint me, and I wouldn’t have to take a chance on losing and ruining my precious resume.” But those are NOT Boards of representative organizations like the OMA

As far as I’m concerned, worrying about offending the egos of some candidates is not enough reason to take away the rights of members to choose ALL of their Board Directors. How much longer will it be before these 3 non-Physician Board candidates will simply be chosen by a process set up by the OMA without any input from the part of members? In case you think it unlikely, that is actually what was initially proposed by the governance consultants in 2019, until we shot it down.

Worse this change was made without an open discussion with the membership. The OMA should have presented arguments for this change to the members in an open, transparent manner. By hiding it in a FAQ without informing members is a betrayal of the principles of giving members power over the OMA. That was the main thrust of the governance changes in the first place.

What can members do? I mentioned in my previous blog that I personally won’t vote for incumbents. It seems that there’s only one incumbent up for re-election, current Board Chair Dr. Cathy Faulds. I have a lot of respect for Dr. Faulds (really). She’s accomplished much in her career (her resume is incredible) with work in health systems transformation/patient care advocacy and bilateral work with governments.

I was considering voting for her based on the fact that a good Board does need to hear all view points (even those that differ from mine) but I so fundamentally disagree with this move, and the current culture the Board has overseen that I personally can’t vote for her now. Whether other members see it that way is up to them.

A glance at the other candidates for Board show that there are 11 candidates who couldn’t be bothered to do a video statement to advertise themselves. Sorry – but as much as I disagree with the current elections process – if you are going to run for the top position at the OMA, and you can’t even find the time to put a video together to advertise yourself – well that is concerning.

My few loyal readers will know that I strongly supported Dr. Ramsey Hijazi last year – and continue to do so this year. He has consistently stood up for members – most recently by setting up a petition demanding that the government stop tormenting Dr. Elaine Ma for running a Covid Vaccination clinic. He’s also been strong in the press. He will get my first vote (which in the weird way the OMA weighs votes is the most important).

After that, there are a number of candidates that caught my eye – in alphabetical order – Dr. Khaled Azzam, Dr. Douglas Belton, Dr. Joy Hately, Dr. Pamela Liao, Dr. Afsheen Mazhar, Dr. Shawn Mondoux, Dr. Sameena Uddin, Dr. Darija Vusovejic. To be clear, members should review all the candidates themselves and vote, but I am going to vote for them after Dr. Hijazi.

As a family doctor, I also have a vote for my SGFP representative. Lots of great candidates running there. It will again, not surprise any of my followers that I will strongly endorse Dr. Nadia Alam for SGFP Vice-Chair. She’s an excellent leader and a dear friend. She took a well deserved break from medical politics for a bit. But it’s good to see her getting involved again and our profession will better for it. I leave the rest of the voting to your good judgement.

Dr. Nadia Alam, Candidate For SGFP Vice-Chair

Disclaimer: NONE of the candidates listed asked me to endorse them.

Arbitration Part IV: What to Make of the New, Updated Payment Schedule

Disclaimer: The payment schedule below is based on my personal analysis of information from the OMA as of December 6, 2024. It would not surprise me if there were more changes. Do NOT use this as your sole source of planning. Contact info@oma.org with any questions.

On Nov. 1, 2024, OMA Board Chair Dr. Cathy Faulds announced an update on how the arbitration award for Year I of our PSA (Fiscal 2024/25) is going to be paid out. The plan was to have final numbers in a couple of weeks. Follow up information didn’t come until December 6 in an OMA news alert. Some things never change.

Wait old country doctor! Didn’t you already do a blog on the Arbitration Award?

Yes, parts two and three of my Arbitration analysis did say what was planned. But the blogs were filled with with statements like “allegedly” “supposedly” and chances of some of the changes happening were “slim to none”.

So we read all your previous work for nothing?

At the risk of sounding somewhat less than humble – most to the stuff I wrote about has come to pass – including splitting the increase with 75% of the amount going towards relativity, and 25% for across the board (ATB) raises.

Well what changed then?

There are a couple of delays (of course) to some of the retroactive payments. But the big change is changing the amount of your increase based on your specialty. I don’t know who came up with the idea of doing this, and suggested it to the OMA’s Negotiations Task Force, but whoever it was deserves the thanks of our profession.

This method is not perfect, because some billing codes are used by more than one speciality. For example, I’m a family physician, but I do joint injections. So do orthopaedic surgeons and rheumatologists. But the billing code (and thus payment) for doing a joint injection is the same. Applying an increase to that code will affect at least three specialties. Therefore, by given specialty specific increases instead, some of the lower relativity specialists will get more of an increase sooner.

The “permanent” changes to the fee codes will now not happen until April 2026 (!!). So expect your income to fluctuate some more then.

Don’t tell me you’re are going to toss large numbers and calculations at me!

I’m going to toss large numbers and calculations at you.

Here are numbers I needed to understand the contract. Numbers rounded for simplicity.

Fiscal Year 2022/23 is the base year for calculations. Physicians budget was $16 billion.
2.8% increase agreed to for 2023/2024 (from last PSA) = $448 million
9.95% awarded by arbitrator for 2024/2025 when compounded with 2023/2024 – total value =$2.085 billion
The plan was to spend 70% on fee increases, and 30% on “targeted” investments. For 2023/2024 this would be $314 million for fee increases, $134 million for targeted investments. For 2024/25 – $1.460 billion for increases, $625 million for targets.
Finally, as of now, it appears that we are going to stick to 25% of the total for fee increases (not the targeted money) will go to across the board (ATB) raises, and the rest based on relativity.

Wait a minute Old Country Doctor – didn’t everyone get the same percentage increase this year?

Yes. Under the terms of a previous agreement, if the OMA and government were not able to sort out how to divide the money for a fiscal year, ALL of it would be paid ATB on a temporary basis. Emphasis on temporary. So we all got a 2.8% increase for 2023/2024 (you should have gotten the retroactive pay in November). Additionally your monthly remittance should be 2.8% higher beginning on the MAY 2024 statement (The increase took effect April 1, but of course, that gets paid out on May 15).

For this fiscal year (2024/25) the OMA and government have conceded they won’t come up with a plan on how to divide the funds, and so everyone will get an ATB of 13%(1.028 x 1.0995). The way it’s paid out will be a mix of monthly increases and some retroactive pay.

However for fiscal 2025/2026, there will be specialty specific increases. Each physician will get another temporary increase in their billings, based on their specialty. The OMA and government will continue to ~~argue~~ negotiate. Probably need arbitration for this. The exact fee code changes are scheduled to be in place April 1, 2026 (!!)

You’re going to bring back Drs. Alpine and Valley to explain this aren’t you?

Of course dear reader. It helps to put a “face” to the numbers. However, on this occasion, let’s assume Dr. Alpine is an ophthalmologist (speciality chosen only because they appear to get the lowest increase) and Dr. Valley is a family doctor in a capitation model (for reasons that will become clear shortly).

I won’t restate the assumptions for my calculations (please refer to my previous blog on this issue). Assuming that Drs Alpine and Valley see the exact same number of patients every year – this is what their gross income will look like.

Time Period	Dr. Alpine	Dr. Valley
Monthly billings 22/23	$100,000	$30,000
Monthly billings 23/24 (increase not applied yet)	$100,000	$30,000
Monthly billings April 2024 till Dec 2024 (2.8% finally applied)	$102,800	$30,840
Nov 15, 2024 (retroactive pay added)	One time payment of $33,600 in retroactive pay for 23/24	One time payment of $10,080 in retroactive pay for 23/24
Jan 15, 2025 – 2.8% lowered to 2.55% as part of agreement to use funds to increase HOCC	$102,550	$30,765
Feb 15, 2025- April 15, 2025 – OHIP will finally given 1.0995 on top of the 1.0255 now	$112, 754	$33,826
May 15, 2025 retroactive pay for April -December	One time payment of $89,583	One time payment of $27,549
May 2025 – April 2026 monthly billings	$102,452	$33,525

WAIT A MINUTE! Capitated Family Doctors gross will go down as well??

Yes. As mentioned above, for 2023/24 and 2024/2025 the OMA and government could not agree how to divide up the now $2.085 billion, so it was given ATB on a temporary basis. This was meant to get some money into doctors hands sooner otherwise Allah/God/Yahweh only knows how long we would have to wait for the process to complete.

However, 30% of the $2.085 billion (or $626 million) was meant for “targeted funds”. The expectation is either through negotiation (very unlikely IMO) or through arbitration, a decision will be made on where to spend that $626 million for fiscal 2025/26.

Therefore, there is only $1.459 billion for general increases for 2025/26 (plus whatever increase the arbitrator gives us). Of that, 25% ($365 million) will go ATB. So everyone will get 2.03%. The remaining $1.094 billion is distributed via relativity.

With less money to distribute – well, there is less of an increase. Now of course the possibility exists that some of the targeted funds will be spent on captitated family medicine too, but who knows at this point? This is why virtually every specialty sees a decline in 2025 when you look at the OMA’s spreadsheet.

Keep in mind the fee increases for April 1, 2025 to March 31, 2028 have yet to be negotiated (more likely arbitrated) so there will be more money in the future – we hope.

I’m not a family doctor or an ophthalmologist- how do I find out my numbers?

I suggest you go to the table that the OMA has prepared for you. Use your base 2022/23 monthly income to figure out your projected numbers. If you have specific questions about your situation, I urge you to contact info@oma.org. The organization can’t really answer questions if they don’t know what they are. Also please register for the live Zoom Webinar on this process, and ask your questions there.

So this is the final word on this issue?

Nope. I suspect there will be more to come. And that it will be just as confusing.

You’re just a bundle of joy Old Country Doctor.

I aim to please dear reader. I aim to please.

Dr. Elaine Ma Case is Proof Ontario is Unfriendly to Physicians

Last week, the Ontario Health Sector Appeal and Review Board (HSARB) denied the appeal by Dr. Elaine Ma in her fight against the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP). At the risk of upsetting Dr. Ma and many (? all) of my colleagues, that decision actually was legally appropriate. HSARB can’t actually look at whether a case is reasonable or not, their job is to go by what’s written in bulletins/updates. The real affront to physicians is that it should never ever have gotten here in the first place.

The Background

For non-physicians reading this, here is a condensed summary of what happened. It’s 2020. The Covid pandemic is raging. Ontario Premier Doug Ford appoints General Rick Hillier to oversee the Covid Vaccination program. He’s tasked with, as Ford calls it, “the largest vaccine rollout in a generation, a massive logistical undertaking, the likes of which this province has never seen.” Hillier’s stated goal? To get shots in everyone’s arms by August 2021.

Dr. Elaine Ma from Kingston realizes the need to act quickly to help her community. She organizes outdoor mass vaccination clinics. Over 35,000 shots were given and Kingston became the most vaccinated area of the province. Dr. Ma was given an Award of Excellence by the Ontario College of Family Physicians for her efforts.

Picture of an outdoor vaccination clinic found elsewhere on the web

The Dispute with OHIP

So what happened? For the Covid vaccine clinics, there were two sets of billing codes assigned. The first was a standard hourly rate. This was meant for physicians who attend a vaccine clinic and perform immunizations there. There were numerous such clinics set up by hospitals/public health/pharmacies and so on. Those agencies paid for the setup costs of those clinics. The physician just showed up and vaccinated.

The second set of codes is used by physicians who give vaccinations in clinics they set up. These codes pay somewhat more, but they’re meant to compensate physicians for the fact that they have to cover all the overhead in those clinics.

Dr. Ma would have had to make sure that things like electricians were hired to ensure that there was power and Internet access outdoors. She may have needed to arrange for commercial grade outdoor tents. Propane heaters to heat the tents and the propane might have been needed. Some staff were paid (others volunteered). All of this organizational work, and figuring out payments, needed to be done in advance. She did it.

She therefore billed OHIP the second code. This is entirely reasonable given the circumstances and the work she did.

So what happened?

The sudden increase in billings did not go unnoticed by OHIP and was flagged. This is absolutely appropriate. As taxpayers, we need to be sure that there is a mechanism to catch outlying bills. The anomaly was sent for review by the various bureaucrats at OHIP. Also appropriate.

So what went wrong?

Basically everything after that. The OHIP bureaucrats reviewed the situation. As pointed out by Perry Brodkin (OHIPs former lawyer, who was quoted extensively in the Kingstonist) – the information was sent “up the hierarchy” and would have reached the deputy health minister and minister.

Former Deputy Minister of Health Dr. Catherine Zahn

The bureaucrats and health minister decided she didn’t qualify for the codes. The reasons given (see the Kingstonist articles for more details) change at a whim. First it was that the clinic was outdoors not inside (you mean at a time when we are all social distancing – we should have crammed unrelated people into a clinic to immunize them??). Then it was that medical students were used (despite the strong endorsement of using medical students by the then Dean of Queen’s University Medical School, Dr. Jane Philpott). Then it was that she paid people to work there.

Dr. Jane Philpott – former Dean of Queen’s University Medical School – and a strong supporter of the vaccination clinics set up by Dr. Ma

Then things got ugly

And finally, after repeated questioning by the Kingsonist, things got really ugly when Hannah Jensen, the communications director for the Minister of Health issues a statement alleging that Dr. Ma “pocketed” the funds. This basically amounted to an allegation of theft by Dr. Ma and was widely viewed as a disgusting, immoral and reprehensible comment in the medical community. Even the Kingstonist was alarmed by this and called the statement “rife with allegations.”

Hannah Jensen, Communications Director for Minister of Health Sylvia Jones (photo from LinkedIn Profile page)

Why this offends doctors so much.

Let’s be clear about this. There is zero tolerance in the broader medical community for misappropriation of funds/intentional fraudulent OHIP billing. Zilch. Nada. But there is a recognition that the imperfect OHIP billing schedule needs to be interpreted with reason, especially when times are unreasonable (and what could possibly be a more unreasonable time than a once in a lifetime pandemic?).

Dr. Ma did all the work to meet the billing criteria (even the OHIP bureaucrats were forced to admit that yes, over 35,000 shots were given and yes she had planned and organized the whole thing). The fact that she did it outside and had medical students help when some 20 year old pre pandemic memos said not to is an unwarranted use of a technicality.

For many physicians, this brings back memories of when another set of bureaucrats persecuted physicians. They even told one paediatric respirologist that in order to bill a code, he had to perform rectal and pelvic exams on children!

What does this mean for Ontario Health care?

First, as Dr. Ma herself pointed out, it is now illegal for physicians to bill any procedures that they delegated to medical students. This means that medical teaching will effectively grind to a halt. Why would any doctor teach a medical student to say, suture a wound, when that doctor would now be financially penalized?

Second, this story has made the national press. It has also been reported in Canadian Journals that cater to physicians and other health care workers. The message to them is clear. Do NOT think of relocating/starting up a practice in Ontario. You will be treated grossly unfairly by the bureaucrats and health minister and there will be no reasonable interpretation of the rules.

What can be done?

According to Brodkin, Health Minister Sylvia Jones and Premier Doug Ford can direct OHIP to disregard the HSARB ruling. They need to do so immediately. However, because politicians only think of re-election, and not what is right, Dr. Ramsey Hijazi, the founder of the Ontario Union of Family Physicians wants to up the pressure on them.

Dr. Ramsey Hijazi, founder of the Ontario Union of Family Physicians – pictured inset.

His group has set up a petition that clearly demands that justice be done in this case. It demands that the Minister and Premier disregard the HSARB ruling. We need to support our health care heroes not penalize them on technicalities in outdated bulletins.

I urge all of my followers to sign the petition. If this case is allowed to go on, trust me on this, there will be negative consequences for health care in Ontario, and we don’t need any more of those.

Click here to sign the petition.

Sunday Snippets: Nov 24, 2025

Another in a weekly series of brief snippets of health care stories that bemused, intrigued and otherwise beguiled me over the past week along with my random thoughts on the matter.

Item: Dr. Sarah Giles writes in the CBC about how she was forced to cut her hours because of the burnout.

My thoughts: Kudos to Dr. Giles for talking so openly about this. Alarmingly few of my colleagues are willing to talk about burnout and how the system is affecting them. Instead they suffer in private, and that’s not healthy for them OR the patients they serve. It’s an important story that needs to be told over and over again.

Item: “Involuntary medical treatment” for people with addiction issues seems to be all the rage. A great article in the “Conversation” shows that this won’t solve anything, and in fact will make things worse.

My thoughts: I really can’t believe we are even discussing this. It has been well known for…..well forever, that people will not get better unless they want to seek help. We have to focus on making seeking help easier, not forcing them.

Item: The always excellent Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, who most of my colleagues know as a superb voice of reason and information during the height of the Covid pandemic, writes about her feelings now that RFK junior has been nominated to lead Health and Human Services in the United States.

My thoughts: My heart goes out to her and all the hard work staff who have tried keep us all safe during the pandemic. They deserve better.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading American Anti-Vax conspiracy theorist, now tapped to head Health and Human Services in the United States

Item: TV Ontario had a segment suggesting that foreign trained physicians could help tackle Ontario’s physician shortage.

My thoughts: I’ll shout it out again, we already have enough family doctors in Ontario who are already licensed to practice medicine in this province and are familiar with the Ontario Health Care system. The number is approximately 6,000 or so (see the graphs in the linked blog for details). Can we just not make it easier to practice family medicine instead??? If we can get even 1/3 of those doctors already in Ontario to start a practice, we would end this crisis.

Item: Great article on the physician gender wage gap in Health Debate. Clearly shows that the gap is real and needs to be corrected.

My thoughts: One of the best accomplishments of the OMA Board when I was on it was to publish the gender pay gap report. It was arguably too late, but I believe we were the first PTMA to discuss this and to use that as a basis for future negotiations work. While I’ve had some issues with how negotiations have been handled since, I am quite comfortable in saying that positions of the OMA in negotiations would take this into account and that there is likely to be funds demanded to narrow this gap. The blame for the fact that there has been no progress on this lies mostly at the feet of the Ministry of Health. We don’t have an agreement yet on how to divide the arbitration award – and that means the Ministry is not responding to OMA proposals that would close this gap. Shame on them.

Item(s): Alberta announced that it hiring a large number of nurse practitioners to become “primary care providers” to patients who don’t have a family doctor.

My thoughts: The National Health System (NHS) in Britain is under fire for the fact that it too tried to replace the work done by fully trained physicians, with staff who were likely well intentioned, but had less qualifications. It turns out there is significant risk to this, and likely a markedly increase cost in providing health care. The article “My wife died because the NHS used cheap labour” should be, in my opinion, required reading for any politician/health care bureaucrat who thinks they can provide better care by using less trained people.

That’s all for this week. Back next week (probably) with more.

Bureaucratic Stupidity in Covid Vaccine Clinic Case Will Have Far Reaching Consequences

I’ve repeatedly been told that I am too unkind and too harsh to Ministry of Health (MOH) bureaucrats. A senior staff member at the OMA once suggested I was “out of line” to a very sharp (but necessary) scolding I gave an MOH bureaucrat at a bilateral meeting we had. About a month later, that same senior staff person, when on a voice conference call with the same bureaucrat, got up and wrote “This is a waste of time” on a chalkboard at OMA headquarters. But I digress.

Yet every time I try to pull back, these same bureaucrats go and do something that is so incomprehensibly stupid that I once again wonder about the talent level and frankly intelligence of the bureaucracy as a whole at the MOH.

On this occasion, I’m referring to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan’s (OHIP) relentless persecution of Dr. Elaine Ma. The whole mess has been extensively reported and you can read all the details in the links, but I will summarize key points below:

October 25, 2024

Dr. Ma’s clinic in Kingston suddenly cancelled its October 26 drive thru flu/covid vaccine clinic. Over 600 patients had registered with more pending. The reason is that OHIP had notified her that she would not be paid to vaccinate patients at the clinic. Why? Because she was going to have medical students (who would be supervised) vaccinate. According to a 2001 bulletin OHIP pulled out, students are not employees and so she can’t delegate to them. (OHIPs story keeps changing and you’ll see that further down the blog). It also emerged that OHIP was attempting to recoup funds paid to her for running similar vaccine clinics in 2021.

October 30, 2024

It was now reported that OHIP was demanding Dr. Ma repay $600,000 that she billed to run outdoor vaccination clinics. She ran a number of mass Covid vaccinations clinics that gave over 35,000 shots. These were set up by her in response to the provinces call to “get shots in peoples arms“at the height of the Covid pandemic. Dr. Ma was widely lauded for her efforts at the time – and won the Ontario College of Family Physicians award of Excellence. Her area became the most vaccinated area of the province, something that should be celebrated.

OHIP now claims that she didn’t follow the rules for billing. Their excuse this time? That clinic was outdoors and not in a doctor’s office. (I told you OHIPs story would keep changing). Yes, you did read that right. In the middle of a pandemic caused by an airborne virus, OHIP wanted the vaccination clinics to be held in crowded indoor spaces!

November 1, 2024

Dr. Ma had rapidly gained the public support of the local medical officer of health (there was likely background support previously). She also had the support (previously background now public) of her MPP, the OMA and many others. She did not get the public support of Dr. Jane Philpott. Dr. Philpott, in her role as Dean of Queens Medical school was full of praise for the clinics. I suspect Dr. Philpott has 550,000 reasons to stay quiet publicly now. Hopefully she can influence behind the scenes.

OHIP now stated that the concern was that Dr. Ma used some of the funds to pay the staff who worked there. You read that right. They were worried because a physician billed OHIP (gasp!) then took the funds to pay overhead (double gasp!!). The horror!

Hannah Jensen, the Minister of Health’s Communications Director initially simply parroted the line that OHIP bureaucrats fed her about being ineligible to bill because of using medical students and it being outdoors. But she was rapidly exposed as being completely out of her depth when the Kingstonist questioned her about dates, which doctor, which clinics, how she arrived at figures and so on.

Additionally, her tone took a seriously ugly and aggressive turn. There was an accusation that Dr. Ma “pocketed the funds” which essentially is an accusation of theft. (No law enforcement is involved….yet).

November 7, 2024

The story hit the national news and it was reported that not only was OHIP asking Dr. Ma to pay back $600,000, but they were demanding $35K in interest as well (!). Who knew OHIP bureaucrats moonlighted as loan sharks??

November 8, 2024

Dr. Hijazi, leader of the Ontario Union of Family Physicians was interviewed by the CBC . He obviously was supportive of Dr. Ma demanded that the Ministry apologize to her. The Ministry issued an utterly and completely delusional statement to CBC radio stating that claims Ontario can’t get family physicians are “fictitious”. (Listen to the last 30 seconds at the link). 2.5 million people can’t get a family doctor in this province because doctors don’t want to work comprehensive care is “fictitious”????

Nothing much to see here. Just a fictitious clinic in Kingston, where fictitious people without a family doctor lined up hoping to get a doctor because a fictitious family doctor announced a new practice..

What consequences are there to this?

To0 many to mention, and they are all awful. Perry Brodkin, OHIPs former lawyer was quoted extensively in the articles about process. He pointed out that before attempting to recoup these funds, the bureaucrats would have run it up the chain to the deputy minister if not the health minister. There is therefore no doubt that this egregious action is one of the bureaucracy as a whole as opposed to one rogue bureaucrat. This cements the feeling that many physicians increasingly have had that bureaucrats as a whole are malicious (especially after the nonsense they claimed during arbitration).

It also badly threatens medical teaching. If the appeal that Dr. Ma filed is unsuccessful, then it essentially means that physicians would not get paid for teaching medical students. Which would effectively end teaching in Ontario. How exactly do you plan to replace the current supply of physicians as they age out, if no one will teach new ones?

With the story hitting the national news on CBC, it also will significantly impair attempts to recruit physicians from out of province. We are already losing younger doctors to provinces like BC and Manitoba where they see a co-operative relationship between government and physicians. Why would any of them come to a Province where you are called a hero one day, and then publicly embarrassed, harassed and vilified over a clearly outdated memo that needed to put aside during a once in a lifetime pandemic?

What SHOULD happen next (but probably won’t)

Unfortunately, Brodkin also points out that at this point there is nothing that will influence the appeal board. The process could have been stopped earlier before the hearing, but Sylvia Jones and her staff chose not to. But, if Dr. Ma wins, the government should immediately announce they will not appeal the decision to the courts. Additionally, Hannah Jensen needs to publicly apologize for her…..out of line…..comment on “pocketing” funds. And Sylvia Jones should also offer up an apology to Dr. Ma for the failure of her bureaucrats to recognize that rigid adherence to minutiae in a time of crisis is completely unacceptable.

Finally, what badly needs to be done is that the entire Ministry of Health bureaucracy needs to be given a very large enema to clear out the…….

Sunday Snippets – November 10, 2024

Another in a weekly series of brief snippets of health care stories that bemused, intrigued and otherwise beguiled me over the past week along with my random thoughts on the matter.

Item: An article in the College of Family Physicians of Canada Journal suggests that “recycling” physicians would help address family physician shortages. This includes “Physicians who have had successful careers in general surgery, emergency medicine, family medicine, hospitalist practices, and other specialties…”

My thoughts: Sigh. I get that the Journal is trying to be open to all views to stir discussion. I get that we are in a family practice crisis in all of Canada right now and looking at unique ways of helping. But seriously – you want to turn a retired general surgeon into a pseudo family doctor? Do you realize just how much you are denigrating family physicians by writing that a good chunk of their jobs can be replaced by people who haven’t done the residency? Some ideas belong in the trash heap and this one deserves to go there. Comprehensive care family physicians CANNOT BE REPLACED by anyone other than another properly trained comprehensive care family physician.

Item: It seems that Quebec is looking to find ways to force doctors to stay in the province and work in their public health system. They are even willing to as far as considering to use the Notwithstanding clause in the Constitution (which they would have to, as their initial position impinges on freedom of movement/assembly to make this happen).

My thoughts: It really does kill me to use Star Wars memes instead of Star Trek ones (really and truly). But once again, for this issue – I’m going to quote Star Wars character Princess Leia:

I honestly don’t know what to do with politicians anymore. There is ample, repeated, overwhelming evidence that whenever they pick fights with physicians, they inevitably lose and health care suffers. And yet they keep doing it.

Item: Dr. Corli Barnes (who I was honoured to have as a guest blogger) wrote in McLean’s Magazine (cover story no less!) about why she moved to Madoc, Ontario and the incentives they provided. I understand she took less than what is listed in the article’s headline, but there were incentives.

My thoughts: I’m happy for Dr. Barnes. I’m happy for the people in her community as well, as they are going to get healthcare from a dedicated family physician and their well being will improve as a result. But I really do wish that our system was no so fragmented and that all communities could offer a consistent level of support to their family physicians.

Item: Premier Doug Ford told patients with minor illnesses not to go to the ER. In response, Drs. Drummond and Venugopal had an op ed where they point out that the Premier is not qualified to determine what is an Emergency.

My thoughts: This will surprise some of you who know that I personally favour the Tommy Douglas model of health care, which supports user fees to dissuade misuse of the health care system. However, that is frankly up to the patients to decide for themselves. Drs. Drummond and Venugopal are correct in saying that politicians are not qualified to hand out medical advice, and should not be saying stuff like this.

Item: A study out of Michigan suggests that more virtual care will not lead to more unnecessary testing. A huge concern has been that if you cannot see a patient in person to assess this, a physician would be more likely to order a test “just to be sure”. This study suggests no.

My thoughts: I think the big flaw of this study is that it looked at patients who were in existing practices getting virtual care from their own physicians. There is a HUGE difference between getting care from your own physician virtually, or getting it virtually from someone you have never met before on some fancy looking app. The two are not the same and it would be very interesting to see how many unnecessary tests are done when there isn’t a pre-existing physician/patient relationship.

Item: Amina Zafar had an excellent piece in the CBC writing about how poorly managed your medical information is. She builds on the story of Greg Price, an unfortunate 31 year old who died of testicular cancer, when he probably shouldn’t have. She writes how this mismanagement of health care information is common in Canada.

My thoughts: Yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes. As far as I’m concerned, the mismanagement of health IT should be the number one issue to be addressed in health care. It creates countless inefficiencies in our health care system. It creates all sorts of admin burden. It leads to much higher expenditures and duplicate testing. This needs to get fixed ASAP.

Item: The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) announced that nominations are open for their annual election periods. Up for grabs are four Board Director positions and many other District and Section positions.

My thoughts: Physicians in Ontario desperately need a strong OMA. The only way that can happen is if front line physicians stand up and take positions. I’ll be frank (and will offend a bunch of people) – but when I was on the Board there were too many Board Directors who clearly were in it for their own self interest and were not thinking of their colleagues. The same could be said for some other elected reps. We will get the OMA we deserve, but only if front line docs take a leading role.

We Know How to Save Family Medicine. Why Aren’t We Doing It?

I’m honoured to have Dr. Mark Linder guest blogging for me today. I first met Dr. Linder during our time advocating against Dr. Eric Hoskins unilateral cuts to health care. He’s exceptionally well spoken and articulate . He’s a former ER doctor and now full time family physician and clinic owner. His other claim to fame is that got fired from the Kaplan MCAT teaching course after one session – which apparently was a first.

I just wrote this in a flurry this morning. I see stupider and stupider proposals from the government and from newspaper editorials. I see our new grads learn from their teachers that they need to stay away from this job. I then see the domino effect this has on recruitment, job satisfaction and reinforced by absurd government initiatives to save the system. I watch the OMA get pulled in every direction to try and please everyone. So apologies in advance -this is just my take really-and mostly to get it off my chest-not that it will lead anywhere. So thanks for reading.

The Family Health Organization (FHO) is what saves family medicine. It has done it before and it can do it again.

In 2006 something unprecedented happened. It hasn’t happened before or since. And perhaps we didn’t quite appreciate how unique it was. The provincial Liberal government, under Dalton McGuinty and Health Minister George Smitherman, introduced an upgraded payment model for Family Medicine. It built on the existing capitation based Family Health Network (FHN) model to enhance it.

What was so unique about this? It stands out as one of the only times a government has thought beyond their 4 year term to the ultimate health of their population as well as their economy down the road when they may no longer be in power. Sure, it was going to make them look good if everyone got a family doctor out of it-but it was a big expensive risk, a risk based on an assumption that family medicine was critical to the system, AND that practitioners need to be paid fairly for their work if they wish to retain these doctors in the future. A different time to be sure!

It worked. Look at the stats from 2008 to 2018. Look at how many Family Doctors gladly embraced the new system. Look how the number of orphaned patients dropped.

The system had flaws. I mean this was the second iteration of what was described as an experiment. The “outside use” enforcement rule made little sense in most cases. The calculation of capitation payments wasn’t always a fair representation of how much work it took to look after the patient in front of you. Certain “in the basket” fees were bizarre and should never have been part of the package. Doctors were actually more incentivized to send people to the ER over a walk in clinic!!! But all in all, it was a great innovation, a great idea, and saved family medicine. It also, no doubt saved the province millions in treatment dollars and ER visits as family doctors made themselves available to look after patients.

And then, In 2015 Kathleen Wynne and Eric Hoskins, the health minister at the time, effectively shut down enrollment in FHOs And that was the beginning of the end. I presume they just wanted to control the immediate budget – paying for family medicine up front meant huge savings down the road. But it resulted in a pretty big chunk of budget going out the door NOW. And the Wynne liberals didn’t have a health care crisis, didn’t heed the warnings that we as physicians laid out pretty starkly at the time, and decided, nah, we’ll just “pause” the experiment.

Which they did. And the fall out was obvious. As a clinic owner and a family doctor, I had a front row seat. The residents and new grads had all been trained in the new system, and now were unable to access it. If they wanted to work, they’d be taking a tremendous risk setting up a clinic in a Fee For Service environment using a Schedule of Benefits that had failed to keep up with inflation for 20 years. They were screwed. The aging Family Doctor population continued to retire at a predictable rate, and the aging population continued to get more desperate to find doctors with increasing difficulty.

By the time the FHO’s opened up again in 2021, it barely mattered–The reputation of family medicine among new grads had been thrashed for 6 years.
With the new rules, new grads would have to gather 6 like-minded individuals (instead of just 3 like in the old days), or find a bigger FHO that was already established and could fit them in. Not so easy. Opening up your own shop had become increasingly more expensive with post pandemic inflation, so the debt would be crippling just to get started if you wanted your own clinic. And these are graduates who already had a huge amount of debt coming out of school.

Couple this with the insane increase in administrative burden as we become more and more efficient at having hospitals and labs forward us copies of paperwork. In theory, amazing, in practice hugely burdensome, time consuming and unpaid. Arguably, if the FHO rates had increased at the level of inflation, there’d be no complaints about this additional work. But the FHO rates had more or less remained static relative to the cost of doing business. Still better than FFS, still paid a lot less than the actual market value of doing the job as proven by the lack of uptake that continues today.

The thing is: The FHO is still the answer. It absolutely needs some significant tweaks. The rates need to go up. The outside use concept needs to go. Minimum size and shared EMR requirement needs to be softened so that smaller groups can join together in nearby geographic areas. Some sort of separate funding will be essential to help clinic owners to keep up with inflation. But it still achieves by far the best mix of physician autonomy, clinic management, and long term government savings. And it’s evidence-based! We have a recent history we can look back on to demonstrate efficacy!

Other solutions, such as having lesser-trained individuals diagnosing and managing patients give the appearance of short term gains at a huge future cost as more referrals to specialists are made and more referrals to the ER are made. Another concept of having government run all clinics is clearly so expensive as to be dead at the gates-Doctors currently pay for rent, administration and their own retirements out of their incomes. It’s not great for us, but it’s a heck of a lot cheaper for the taxpayer to do it that way, and simply pay the doctors more.

I recognize that my FFS colleagues are not helped at all by an enhancement and advocacy for the FHO approach. And I’m sorry. I obviously think there’s a lot of work that could be done to improve FFS rules and individual payments. No doubt.

But we actually have the evidence that the FHO saved family medicine when it was introduced. It was stunningly effective, and if nursed back to health, will absolutely work again.