Monday, January 26, 2015

Transparency about medical errors a ‘magic bullet’ that could help make heath care safer: report

| | Last Updated: Jan 24 3:03 PM ET
More from Albert Quon
An x-ray shows a surgical instrument that was left inside a patient's  body after surgery.  Research suggests that about 70,000 patients a year experience preventable, serious injury as a result of treatments in Canada.
Improving transparency around medical error is a potential “magic bullet” that could finally start to make health care less hazardous after years of lacklustre efforts, concludes a new report from a major American patient-safety organization.
Increasing openness would bring “powerful effects” and cost relatively little to implement, the National Patient Safety Foundation report argues.
NP
Among the institute’s 39 recommendations is for health care institutions to create a culture where transparency is rewarded and failing to speak up brings “consequences”; informing all patients about their clinician’s experience, outcomes and disciplinary history; and requiring that hospitals and other facilities publicly report on their performance.

“If transparency were a drug, it would likely be a blockbuster, given the evidence of its effectiveness and its enthusiastic endorsements from key stakeholders,” said the organization. “How can patients fully trust the clinicians and organizations from which they receive care if these clinicians and organizations are not fully transparent?”

The report from the foundation’s Lucian Leape Institute was released this week, as a National Post series revealed that most of the thousands of cases of serious medical error estimated to occur in Canadian hospitals every year go unreported even within the facilities. And less information about those mishaps is divulged publicly.

Four provinces release no data at all, most of the rest provide only limited statistics. Manitoba alone releases any detail — in the form of terse, one-line descriptions — on specific incidents.

The foundation notes that, if anything, the rate of medical error has grown worse since the U.S. Institute of Medicine first published a study 15 years ago estimating the extent of the problem.

It was followed in Canada in 2004 with a study that estimated about 70,000 preventable, serious adverse events occur in acute-care hospitals annually, with 9,000 to 23,000 patients dying because of avoidable errors.

Efforts to fix the problem, including education programs, computerization, changes to organizational culture and root-cause analysis, have had limited impact, says the American report, called Shining a Light.

But exposing the system to further scrutiny – “the free, uninhibited flow of information that is open to the scrutiny of others” — could make a real difference, it argues.
“We believe the missing ingredient, the essential element needed to enable the operational and culture changes to occur, is transparency,” said the institute. “Patients have a right to full information about every aspect of their care. Without it, optimal care is an elusive dream.”

Research suggests that releasing information about the outcomes of health care leads to better practices, the report said, and is more effective than, say, offering incentive payments for good performance, an increasingly popular concept in Canada.

The report warned, however, there are many barriers to increased openness, such as fear of harm to reputation, livelihood or pride; and the desire of some players in the system to maintain the status quo and “resist the sharing of information.”

But deliberate withholding of information puts patients at risk and represents a “moral failure,” the report said.
National Post
• Email: tblackwell@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/22/transparency-about-medical-errors-a-magic-bullet-that-could-help-make-heath-care-safer-report/
 

Personal injury lawyer launches challenge against Bill 15

A lawyer has launched a constitutional challenge on behalf of automobile accident victims aimed directly at Bill 15.

Lawyer and advocate Joseph Campisi is launching a constitutional challenge in the Ontario Superior Courts, seeking a declaration that parts of the legislation that were recently passed by the Liberal Government are discriminatory and unconstitutional and should be inoperative.

“The right to access the Superior Courts is a fundamental right for Canadians.  I am concerned that the recent proclaimed legislation will deny this right to individuals who have been severely disabled,” said personal injury lawyer Joseph Campisi.  “Historically, the deck has been stacked against automobile victims. The recent amendments to the legislation have turned a bad situation into a worse one for these vulnerable individuals.”

In the fall, of 2014, the Ontario passed Bill 15, which took aim at fraud in the insurance industry with the aim of reducing insurance rates.

One of the legislative amendments changes how disputes between insurers and insured are settled, which has raised the ire of groups like FAIR and those in the health care industry, like the Ontario Rehab Alliance.

Historically, disputes could be brought before the Superior Courts or before arbitrators with expertise in interpreting insurance law.  Bill 15 has changed how disputes are resolved by giving the sole adjudicative power to individuals who will be appointed “at the whim of the Liberal Government,” said Campisi.

“No longer will these individuals be allowed to have the assurance of impartiality and independence that is a cornerstone of our justice system when litigating a claim against their own insurance company,” said Campisi. “I could not stand idly by and let this happen.”

These are the same decision makers who jurisdiction on matters ranging from film classification to upholstered and stuffed articles, Campisi went on to say, adding that unlike historical appointments individuals without any specialization or guaranteed independence or impartiality will be ruling on disputes that can run into the millions of dollars and will determine the quality of life that an automobile victim will face going forward.

“This application will challenge Bill 15 on the basis that it violates disabled person’s Charter s.15 (1) right to be free from discrimination,” he said. “Bill 15 is also being challenged based on s.96 of the Constitution which relates to the public’s right to have access to the courts.  The way in which Bill 15 is drafted opens the door to political interference.  The government of the day can choose who will hear any dispute and if the government does not agree with the arbitrator’s decisions, the government can get rid of the adjudicator the next day.  When it comes to lobbying the government there is little doubt as to who has the deeper pockets; automobile insurers or accident victims.  Introducing such laws is undemocratic and detracts from the rule of law.  This legal challenge will fight for disabled individuals’ right to fair treatment and the public’s right to access the impartial court system.”

Barb Taylor, the director of policy at the Insurance Bureau of Canada, had spoken out last Thursday on what she saw as “strong opponents” of those fighting for change in the insurance industry. Click here for the article, 15 per cent target for Ontario auto 'does not compute'

“We have strong opponents. These groups also have the ear of government and will seek media attention. Specifically, I am talking about trial lawyers, medical rehab providers and the NDP,” Taylor told those gathered for the 2015 Crystal Ball conference. “We are asking the (Ontario) government to require personal injury lawyers and paralegals who represent auto insurance claimants to submit to the Superintendent all information about their fees – including contingency fee arrangements, disbursements, court awarded and settled costs, and referral arrangements."

Source: 

Resolving auto insurance benefit disputes stacked against public

By , Toronto Sun
First posted: | Updated: Auto insurance claims 
TORONTO - With last year’s passage of Bill 15, the “Fighting Fraud and Reducing Automobile Insurance Rates Act, 2014”, the handling of accident benefits disputes in Ontario is to be passed from the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT).
There are obvious reasons for the public to fear this transition.

FSCO handles about 10,000 applications each year, compared to LAT’s 700.
FSCO arbitrators and mediators have a wealth of experience in a highly specialized area, while LAT members have no experience in accident benefits disputes.

Instead, LAT members have expertise in liquor licence appeals, reviews of medical suspension of drivers’ licences, motor vehicle impoundments and claims under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan.

Courtesy of Canadians for Properly Built Homes (CFPBH), a national, non-profit consumer protection organization, we have a report analyzing 2006-2013 LAT decisions pertaining to homeowner appeals of Tarion decisions concerning new home warranties.

Tarion is the private corporation created by the Ontario government to protect new homebuyers and administer new home warranties, although its board of directors is controlled by builders.

CFPBH has concluded LAT’s “operations and performance need improvement both in relation to the adjudicators themselves (specifically in relation to self-represented parties) and the LAT’s management and administrative processes.”

The numbers in the CFPBH study present a dire picture for homeowners who dare to enter the LAT’s chambers.

During the eight-year period of the study, LAT gave homeowners a 96% failure rate in relation to major deficiency claims.

The annual failure rate for total issues presented by homeowners in the last three years of the study is 82%, 83% and 94%.

The number of appeals brought before LAT dropped from 119 in the first four years of the study to 69 in the last four.

It’s impossible to know why the numbers have dropped off but CFPBH believes many homeowners have given up and made repairs themselves while some have resorted to what they call “patch and run” tactics.

That is, homeowners patch up the deficiencies and place their homes on the market for resale without disclosing the builders’ defects.

Still others bypass LAT completely and pursue remedies through the courts.
Yet this very avenue has been taken away from those seeking accident benefits arising from vehicle crashes.

Bill 15 removes this option and forces all accident benefit claims to be resolved without recourse to courts.

Karen Somerville, President of CFPBH, believes LAT has “serious shortcomings” and purchasers of new homes urgently need — and deserve — a fair and appropriate appeal process for the largest purchase most consumers make: a home.

LAT’s numbers seem to support Somerville’s contention. Certainly there doesn’t appear to be a level playing field between homeowners and Tarion.
All of which begs the question, why was LAT chosen to administer the automobile insurance dispute resolution system?

Hopefully many current FSCO arbitrators will be moved over to LAT so their expertise won’t be lost.

But that doesn’t change the fact LAT members are part-time (other than the Associate Chair), appointed for temporary terms, receive per diem rates (other than the Associate Chair), and are government appointees.

Reappointment is at the pleasure of the Ontario cabinet, so they cannot be seen as independent.

Current FSCO arbitrators are full-time, unionized, public sector employees.
It is difficult to see how the transfer of jurisdiction from FSCO to LAT will serve to either fight auto insurance fraud or reduce rates, although it is easy to see how the transfer will result in massive new expenditures and may result in injustices.

But shouldn’t we first be fixing LAT and providing purchasers of new homes with meaningful remedies, before we throw 10,000 new auto insurance disputes at it?


Saturday, January 24, 2015

Splinter group of Ontario doctors planning a protest ‘job fair’


DoctorsOntario, a break-away group unhappy with the Ontario Medical Association, says it wants to help MDs find jobs in jurisdictions "friendlier" than OntarioDr. Douglas Mark leads a breakaway group unhappy with the OMA's representation of doctors in Ontario.


Richard Lautens / Toronto Star file photo 

Dr. Douglas Mark leads a breakaway group unhappy with the OMA's representation of doctors in Ontario. 

A splinter group of doctors, angry with the outcome of the province’s negotiations with the Ontario Medical Association, is planning a job fair to help physicians find work in “friendlier” jurisdictions.

DoctorsOntario (formerly the Coalition of Family Physicians and Specialists of Ontario) will hold a job fair this spring to help doctors find jobs in “places where doctors are cherished and respected and not made to be scapegoats for the failures of others,” said the organization’s interim president, Dr. Douglas Mark, a Scarborough family physician.

The province last week imposed a new payment scheme on doctors after a year of negotiations with the OMA resulted in an impasse.

It will see a 2.65 per cent cut to all physician payments, including fee-for-service, salaries and alternative payment plans.

The pay cut will grow if doctors don’t stay within their budget of $11.4 billion this year and 1.25 per cent more in each of the next two years.

Health Minister Eric Hoskins has said that physician compensation has jumped by 61 per cent since the Liberals took power in 2003, with doctors now earning an average of $360,000 annually.

From their payments, doctors must pay overhead costs that amount on average to about 30 per cent of their billings.

DoctorsOntario is a small group of physicians unhappy with how the OMA has represented the profession. Mark said it has 1,000 members, up from 500 last year. The OMA, the recognized bargaining agent for doctors, has 28,000 members.

Mark said physicians are paying the price for the government’s inability to balance the budget and charged that it has “blown several billion dollars on various boondoggles,” including eHealth, ORNGE and the gas-fired power plants cancellation.

Former OMA president Dr. Doug Weir said DoctorsOntario “is not taken seriously by the majority of physicians in the province.”

Weir called the group’s approach “destructive” and said it’s important for physicians to try to work with the province.

On that note, he said he hopes the government will come back to the bargaining table, and said doctors are willing to take a pay freeze.

Even with a pay freeze taken into account, overall spending on physicians needs to grow at about 2.7 per cent annually to meet demands from a growing and aging population and to pay 700 new physicians who are graduating from medical school, Weir said.

Given this, it’s inevitable that doctors won’t be able to stay within their budget, he said, warning that patient care will ultimately suffer.

Weir said family physicians are getting the rawest deal because the province is not allowing any more doctors to join family health teams.

That might result in new grads going to other jurisdictions, he warned.


Source: http://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2015/01/22/splinter-group-of-ontario-doctors-planning-a-protest-job-fair.html
 

Medical association president claims funding cap will lead to rationed care

Dr. Ven Tandan,   president of the Ontario Medical Association, speaks with the Windsor Star editorial board in Windsor on Thursday, January 22, 2015.       (TYLER BROWNBRIDGE/The Windsor Star) 
Dr. Ven Tandan, president of the Ontario Medical Association, speaks with the Windsor Star editorial board in Windsor on Thursday, January 22, 2015. (TYLER BROWNBRIDGE/The Windsor Star)  

Dave Waddell
Ontario Medical Association president Dr. Ved Tandan warned that the provincial government’s imposition of changes to the Physician Services Agreement (PSA) could result in the rationing of services to patients.

The Hamilton-based surgeon is making the rounds of the province to discuss the fallout of the collapse of talks between physicians and the government last week.
“There were multiple things (why we rejected the offer), probably the most significant being the arbitrary cap on the number of medical services that can be delivered in Ontario,” Tandan said Thursday during an editorial board meeting with the Windsor Star.

“They told us the amount that can be provided, based purely on the budget not based on any measure of the health-care needs of the population.

“They want us to ration health care for patients to save money in the budget.”
Tandan said the government would begin clawing back money from the group as a whole once the overall budgeted number was reached.

The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care Eric Hoskins took issue with Tandan’s comments.

“There can be no justification for doctors turning away patients or rationing care. And we don’t believe that Ontario’s doctors would let that happen,” Hoskins said in an email to The Star.

There is no cap on the number of patients a doctor could treat. There is no restriction on the amount of services a physician can provide.

Physicians rejected an offer of an increase in their PSA of 1.25 per cent annually in a three-year contract last week.

The third year of the deal also included a one-time payment of $117 million to help alleviate physician’s increased overheard costs.

The government’s offer would have seen the funds designated for physicians increase from $11.29 billion to $11.72 billion by the end of agreement in 2017.
The average doctor bills the province $361,000 per year, but Tandan said 40 per cent of that is consumed by staff salaries and other overhead costs.

Doctors have been without a contract since March 31, 2014.

“Ontario’s doctors are among the highest paid in Canada,” Hoskins said in his email response.

“I remain disappointed that they rejected our offer,” he said. “This is about doctors’ compensation. We are not cutting services.”

Despite no new talks being scheduled, Tandan said there are no plans by doctors to slow down or disrupt the system in anyway. Doctors aren’t allowed to strike.
“The government has decided to fund less than half of the growth (2.7 per cent) they know is required (to meet the demand for services),” Tandan said. “It’s important doctors also understand the financial situation of the province and government. We’re willing to do our part.

“We took a four-per-cent cut in fees in 2012 and we’ve offered to freeze fees for another two years.”

The government claims the previous four per cent cut didn’t achieve the savings expected as doctors treated more patients and filed more billings than anticipated.

As a result, the ministry isn’t budging on its desire for a hard cap in the PSA on total compensation.

The government increased the stakes last week by imposing harsher terms on physicians in an effort to achieve the desired savings of $580 million in the new PSA.

Among the cuts were a 2.56 per cent reduction to OHIP fees, eliminating funding for continuing education, reducing the fee for walk-in clinic patients by a $1.70 to bring it in line with doctors’ regular patients and limiting the number of family doctors in well-serviced areas who can join family health-care teams where physicians are paid by the number of patients rather than on a fee-per-service basis.

The government has also eliminated the premium for doctors to accept healthy new patients.

Tandan said these measures do little to address the underlying issues of 900,000 Ontarians still not having a family doctor and the fact another 140,000 enter the health-care system each year.

“We need more doctors to meet the need for health care,” Tandan said. “It’s not about us as individuals. We’re willing to take a freeze on fees.”

Tandan said Ontario already has the fewest doctors per capita in the country and things will only get worse under these new measures.

He said the OMA has tabled other suggestions aimed at saving the system money and supports conserving funds where it doesn’t impact care.

One such proposal would see the elimination of pre-operative consults and assessments for low-risk surgery. The OMA expects the Schedule of Benefits to be revised to reflect those standards after an evaluation is done.
dwaddell@windsorstar.com

Source: http://blogs.windsorstar.com/news/medical-association-president-claims-funding-cap-will-lead-to-rationed-care

Constitutional Challenge Launched Against Flawed Ontario Liberal Government Auto Insurance Legislation- Discriminatory and Unconstitutional

January 21, 2015
 
Toronto, January 21, 2015 – Joseph Campisi, lawyer and advocate, is launching a constitutional challenge in the Ontario Superior Courts.  Mr. Campisi is seeking a declaration from the courts that parts of the legislation that were recently passed by the Liberal Government are discriminatory and unconstitutional and should be inoperative.

“The right to access the Superior Courts is a fundamental right for Canadians.  I am concerned that the recently proclaimed legislation will deny this right to individuals who have been severely disabled.” said applicant and noted Personal Injury Lawyer Joseph Campisi.  “Historically, the deck has been stacked against collision victims.  The recent amendments to the legislation have turned a bad situation into a worse one for these vulnerable individuals.  No longer will these individuals be allowed to have the assurance of impartiality and independence that is a cornerstone of our justice system when litigating a claim against their own insurance company.  I could not stand idly by and let this happen.”

In the fall, of 2014, the Ontario Government passed Bill 15 which is titled Fighting Fraud and Reducing Automobile Insurance Rates.  One of the legislative amendments changes how disputes between insurers and insured are settled.  Historically, disputes could be brought before the Superior Courts or before sophisticated arbitrators with expertise in interpreting insurance law.  Bill 15 has changed how disputes are resolved by giving the sole adjudicative power to individuals who will be appointed at the whim of the Liberal Government.  These are the same decision makers who have jurisdiction on matters ranging from film classification to upholstered and stuffed articles. Unlike historical appointments, individuals without any specialization or guaranteed independence or impartiality will be ruling on disputes that can run into the millions of dollars and will determine the quality of life that an automobile victim will face going forward.

“This application will challenge Bill 15 on the basis that it violates disabled persons’ Charter s.15 (1) right to be free from discrimination.  Bill 15 is also being challenged based on s.96 of the Constitution which relates to the public’s right to have access to the courts.  The way in which Bill 15 is drafted opens the door to political interference.  The government of the day can choose who will hear any dispute and if the government does not agree with the arbitrator’s decisions, the government can get rid of the adjudicator the next day.  When it comes to lobbying the government there is little doubt as to who has the deeper pockets- automobile insurers or accident victims.  Introducing such laws is undemocratic and detracts from the rule of law.  This legal challenge will fight for disabled individuals’ right to fair treatment and the public’s right to access the impartial court system.”

For more information go to https://www.campisilaw.ca
Source Campisi LLP
For further information contact:
Cesar Carranza  cesar@campisilaw.ca

Source: https://www.campisilaw.ca/constitutional-challenge-launched-against-flawed-ontario-liberal-government-auto-insurance-legislation/

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Infected and undocumented: Thousands of Canadians dying from hospital-acquired bugs

| | Last Updated: Jan 20 9:24 AM ET
More from Tom Blackwell | @tomblackwellNP

Brenda Dyck, the sister in-law of Kim Smith holds her portrait as her father, Gord Smith and brother Trevor Smith look on in her Winnipeg, Manitoba home. Kim Smith, went to hospital last year for an elective hysterectomy, the surgical wound became infected and she ended up dying in agony days later from necrotizing fasciitis - flesh eating disease.

Kim Smith was no stranger to stress — her job in community corrections often brought her face to face with members of Winnipeg’s violent street gangs.
But as she lay in a local hospital’s gynecology ward more than a year ago, nurses called her brother with an unusual question: Did Kim suffer from any kind of emotional troubles?


The woman, her caregivers said, had been telling them she wanted to kill herself.
It was a shocking turn of events, coming a week after Ms. Smith entered St. Boniface Hospital for a routine hysterectomy and ovary removal. In the days since the operation, however, she had been complaining of escalating pain in her gut, so intense she began to fear for her life — and then apparently wanted to end it.

By the time medical staff took the woman’s complaints seriously, an infection inside her belly had developed into necrotizing fasciitis (flesh-eating disease) and devoured large chunks of her abdomen.

Within hours of emergency surgery to drain “brown, foul-smelling liquid” and excise dead tissue, and four days after her 45th birthday, Ms. Smith was dead.
“She kept yelling at me, ‘I know my body, I know there’s something wrong in my stomach and nobody wants to listen to me. And I’m going to end up dying here,’ ” said Brenda Dyck, her sister-in-law. “She died the most horrible, painful death anybody could suffer, and nobody would listen to her and reach out to her.”
Ms. Smith’s tragic demise was more dramatic than many cases of hospital-acquired infection (HAI).  Necrotizing fasciitis is a frightening, but rare, complication. Still, about 8,000 Canadians a year die from bugs they contract in facilities meant to make them better, while many more see their hospital stay prolonged by such illness.

Yet after years of well-intentioned work and millions of dollars spent on combatting the scourge, the details and extent of the problem remain murky.
No national statistics, for instance, document the number of surgical-wound infections like Ms. Smith’s, one of the most common types of hospital-acquired pathogens.

A federal agency now publishes rates of sepsis, or blood infection, at individual hospitals, but their methodological value is a matter of debate. Government tracking of worrisome, drug-resistant bacteria is patchy and of questionable practical use, say infectious-disease physicians.

“There is no question that at a national level, both our surveillance for hospital-acquired infection and our surveillance for anti-microbial resistance is not serving our needs,” said Allison McGeer, an infectious-disease specialist at Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital. “[And] we know, very substantially, that you can’t fix what you’re not measuring.”

Meanwhile, important lessons about how diseases spread inadvertently within health facilities often come to light in fits and start.

Two hospitals in Toronto and one in Quebec, for instance, announced independently in the late 2000s that they had discovered contaminated sinks were the source of separate, deadly outbreaks of infection.

Some word of the episodes got out through specialized medical journal articles, academic conferences and sporadic news stories. But there is no systematic way of disseminating such information across the system, said Darrell Horn, a former patient-safety investigator for the Winnipeg Region Health Authority.
“It’s just totally loosey-goosey,” he said.
You could sit and call every hospital in the country, and ask them when was the last time they cleaned the sink in the [neonatal intensive care unit] and how they cleaned it, and you’d get nothing but blank stares
“You could sit and call every hospital in the country, and ask them when was the last time they cleaned the sink in the [neonatal intensive care unit] and how they cleaned it, and you’d get nothing but blank stares.”

Handout
 
 
Health care is paying much more attention, at least, to the HAI problem than it did a decade ago, said Dr. Michael Gardam, infection-control director at Toronto’s University Health Network.

Following heavy media coverage of the mostly hospital-based SARS outbreak and numerous deadly hospital infestations of C. difficile, facilities started hiring more experts, encouraging hand-washing and generally striving to prevent infection – rather than just treat it after the fact as an unavoidable cost of doing medical business.

Dr. Gardam’s hospitals have even begun characterizing hospital-acquired infections as adverse events, akin to more traditional medical error.
Whether because of such measures or not, Ms. Smith had few fears when she entered St. Boniface on Sept. 30, 2013, for an operation for uterine fibroids, her family says.

She likely did not know that most surgical-wound infections arise from bacteria patients carry into hospital on their skin, which can then sneak inside through incisions, especially when infection-control safeguards are not optimum.

As early as the day after her operation, the Métis woman began to complain of pain in her abdomen, only to be told by nurses that she simply needed to walk about, Ms. Dyck recalls.

Some of that suffering is reflected in her patient charts, obtained by the family and provided to the National Post.

On Oct. 1, she complained of gastrointestinal bloating and discomfort; the following day, heartburn, bloating and slight nausea, the records note.
On Oct. 3, the chart refers to her feeling unwell and weak, then projectile vomiting. The next day, she had “lots of gas pains,” and the day after that abdominal pain “controlled with PO” (prescription opioids).
Finally, early on Oct. 6, came the call about her self-destructive thoughts.
“Nurse found her confused, half-naked, pulled her IV out anxious. Saying she is at her end and is suicidal,” the chart said. A later notation suggested anxiety was prolonging her recovery and the sedative Ativan was administered.

Then, sitting at her side 12 hours later, her brother Trevor Smith noticed a strange purple discolouring of his sister’s feet, the kind of “mottling” that can be a sign of imminent death, and raised the alarm.

Lyle Stafford for National Post

Ms. Smith was soon being wheeled into the operating room, where the surgeons who opened her up first observed “a large effluent of brown, foul-smelling liquid from the abdominal cavity.” They removed several abscesses, drained the liquid, then discovered the worst — necrotizing fasciitis expanding through the peritoneum (the lining of the abdomen) and abdominal muscles.

St. Boniface declined to comment on the case, saying it was prevented from doing so by provincial legislation. But Ms. Dyck said one doctor told her staff had likely not adequately disinfected her sister-in-law’s stomach before the hysterectomy, ensuring any bacteria that came with her into the operating room stayed on the outside.

medical-errors-

While not every surgical infection is preventable, “they can be dramatically minimized” with well-documented precautions, Dr. Gardam says.

If hospital infections are at least sometimes preventable, to what extent is the problem being monitored and how much of that information becomes public?
Some provinces, such as Ontario and British Columbia, require hospitals to report to the government on a few common infections, such as C. difficile, blood infections transmitted by the “central lines” used to access major blood vessels, and pneumonia from ventilator use. Ontario hospitals must report their compliance with tactics designed to prevent surgical infections, though not the infections themselves.

Experts debate whether publicly reporting data actually benefits health care, but a 2012 study found that C. difficile rates in Ontario hospitals dropped by 25% after the province started divulging statistics on the disease.

Many provinces, though, have no such requirements, and the national picture is hazy. The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) reports rates of sepsis, and stats that indirectly address infection, such as the rate of death and re-admission to hospital following some procedures.

Some infectious-disease specialists, though, are unimpressed by its infection numbers, obtained by analyzing hospital records after the fact.

“Garbage in, garbage out,” Dr. McGeer said of the figures. “You cannot count infections using CIHI data, and CIHI knows that.”

What is needed to paint an accurate picture is experts at each hospital reporting “true cases,” she says.

That is the goal of the Public Health Agency of Canada’s Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program, arguably the country’s premiere example of transparency on the diseases that health care gives its patients.

The program’s focus is drug-resistant bacteria, the increasingly familiar methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) and C. difficile. It is based, though, on a sampling of just 57 teaching hospitals, a fraction of the country’s 250 or so acute-care hospitals. The SARS outbreak, for instance, erupted at a community hospital that is not part of that network.

Infectious-disease doctors have long complained that it takes too long for the data those hospitals submit to the Agency to be posted.

Lyle Stafford for National Post

“If I want to know what’s happening with MRSA, I call my friends,” said Dr. McGeer.

More complete, and easier to access, is the system developed by the European Centre for Disease Control, says Lynora Saxinger, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Alberta. It not only tracks drug-resistant bugs, but matches those stats with the use — or possible over-use — of antibiotics, considered the main cause of the problem.

The latest concern of infectious-disease specialists is a class of antibiotic-defeating organisms known as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriacaeae (CRE), a “game changer,” said Dr. Saxinger. The death rate is as high as 50%.
CRE is part of the public health agency’s surveillance system, meaning those 57 hospitals submit their numbers, but Dr. McGeer said all acute-care hospitals in Canada should have to report them.

Meanwhile, “the last CRE outbreak … I heard about it on the news,” said Dr. Saxinger.

There is no evidence Ms. Smith was infected with a drug-resistant organism, but by the time she went in for emergency surgery, it appears little could have saved her. Indeed, once begun, necrotizing fasciitis has a 70% death rate.
Early the next morning, her blood pressure had sunk, the tell-tale black of more dead tissue had spread around her side to her back and she went into cardiac arrest, dying minutes later.

The hospital investigated the incident and assured the family that lessons learned from it would be passed on to staff — and help future patients, says Ms. Dyck. Mr. Horn says his experience across Canada suggests it is unlikely those lessons will be shared with anyone else in the health-care system, or the public.
Meanwhile, Ms. Dyck says the sight of doctors and nurses fruitlessly attempting to revive her sister-in-law — her abdomen left open as part of the flesh-eating treatment — remains etched in her mind, as is the thought it might all have been prevented.

“What I witnessed, I was traumatized by for months and months,” she said.
“It was just a terrible, terrible, painful death. And she knew she was going to die, that’s the worst thing.”

National Post
• Email: tblackwell@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/19/infected-and-undocumented-thousands-of-canadians-dying-from-hospital-acquired-bugs/
 

Inside Canada’s secret world of medical error: ‘There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up’

| | Last Updated: Jan 19 5:16 PM ET
More from Tom Blackwell | @tomblackwellNP



As Helen Church woke up one morning just before Christmas 2012, the pain that had been building for weeks behind her right eye reached an excruciating climax.

Screaming in agony, she ran around her east-end Toronto apartment before finally managing to call 911 and passing out.

For the second time in short succession, she had fallen victim to health care gone badly awry.

Just two years earlier, Ms. Church went to a nearby hospital to have an ovary removed as treatment for a painful cyst. She left hours later with the ovary still in place — and a piece of mesh embedded in her abdomen to repair a non-existent hernia.

Then, months later, a specialist replaced an artificial, cataract-correcting lens that he said had started to wear. The result: That eye was now blind and growing increasingly painful.

The ophthalmologist, another specialist told her later, had implanted the lens in the wrong position, obscuring her sight and puncturing a duct, causing a slow bleed and massive pressure.

“There was so much blood in there, it blew the eyeball out of my head. It was hanging on my cheek,” said Ms. Church, a razor-sharp 83-year-old. “The blood was just dripping everywhere … I was hysterical, the pain was so bad.”

Both incidents point to dangerous breakdowns in the Canadian health-care system. But don’t expect to find any public record of either apparent blunder — or of thousands of similarly harmful and sometimes deadly mistakes that occur in facilities across the country each year.

Most instances of the system hurting rather than healing patients, in fact, are not even reported by staff internally, a National Post investigation has documented.

Research suggests that about 70,000 patients a year experience preventable, serious injury as a result of treatments. More shocking, a landmark study published a decade ago estimated that as many as 23,000 Canadian adults die annually because of preventable “adverse events” in acute-care hospitals alone.
The rate of errors may be even higher today, some evidence suggests, despite the millions of dollars spent on much-touted patient-safety efforts.

Yet a tiny fraction of those cases are publicly acknowledged and usually only in the form of antiseptic statistics. For most serious treatment gaffes, not even the sparsest of details is revealed, making the vast problem all but invisible.

The Post has also learned there is no routine, public documentation of one common source of health-care harm — malfunctioning medical devices linked to dozens of deaths and hundreds of serious injuries every year.

“Learnings from these things, even when a good investigation is done, are going into black holes,” said Darrell Horn, a “critical-incident” investigator who spent several years with the Winnipeg Region Health Authority. “They’ve created this perfect, invisible box to put everything in.”

Manitoba is actually a rare exception to the opaqueness that shrouds medical error in Canada; single-line descriptions the province has released for the last three years offer at least a snapshot of what calamities can befall patients.
Among the 100 cases reported in the three months ending Sept. 30, 2013, was that of a new mother who had a heart attack after staff inadvertently gave her a blood-pressure-increasing medication, instead of a nausea antidote following a caesarean section.

Another patient, known to be at risk for blood clots, suffered a fatal cardiac arrest when staff neglected to provide preventive treatment after surgery.
A woman needed a second operation after an X-ray revealed a screw from a broken clamp had been left inside her during a C-section.

And, without further explanation, one patient “underwent unnecessary open-lung biopsy.”

For the rest of the country, such cases occur in a vacuum, most not reported at all and virtually none described with any kind of narrative.

In fact, legislation in most provinces bars information on adverse events being released to malpractice plaintiffs or publicly divulged under freedom-of-information acts. The laws are designed — with limited success — to encourage internal reporting of mistakes.

A health-care culture still straitjacketed by an old-fashioned hierarchy, fear of legal action and a focus on punishment rather than learning from mistakes also keeps missteps bottled up, say health workers and safety experts.

A nurse at an Ontario hospital, who asked not to be identified for fear of repercussions, said she works with two surgeons whose skills are so lacking, “I wouldn’t even want them to touch my dog.”

She filed an anonymous complaint against one several years ago, but little changed. Now, she stays mum about problems ranging from high rates of post-op infections to surgeries frequently needing re-dos.

“We do turn a blind eye and walk away,” the nurse admitted. “There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up, which turns my stomach.”

By contrast, preventable injury and deaths in many other arenas — from homicides to industrial accidents and road crashes — are routinely divulged by police or other authorities.
There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up, which turns my stomach
The starkest counterpoint to health care’s lack of transparency around error, however, is offered by the aviation industry.

On the way to dramatically improving the safety of flying, the sector has become conspicuously open about its mishaps. Canada’s Transportation Safety Board, for instance, posts details online of current investigations into everything from actual crashes to ground vehicles inadvertently driving across airport runways.
The constant, transparent exchange of safety information not only helps curb accidents, but enhances passengers’ confidence in the industry, says John Pottinger, an aviation-safety consultant and former Transport Canada official.
“Where the public even thinks it is being deceived or doesn’t have the whole story, then right away we get suspicious,” he said.


Source: 

The high cost of bad faith

Highlighting the folly of denying a claim on slim evidence

By Matthew Pearn January 16 2015 issue
 

Two recent, expensive bad-faith awards should serve as a reminder to long-term disability insurers of the boundary line between fair and foul play. When defending against an insured’s civil claim for insurance benefits, using sparse evidence to deny a claim or applying financially punishing tactics to pressure an insured into settlement will in all likelihood violate the insurer’s duty of good faith. Even the insurer’s tactics during the trial may prove to be the basis of a pricey bad-faith award.

In Ontario, the recent ruling of Fernandes v. Penncorp Life Insurance Co. [2014] O.J. No. 4039, speaks to the risk of an insurer developing tunnel vision, ignoring an abundance of medical evidence supporting the total disability of an insured in favour of slight surveillance evidence counseling against it.

In 2004, Avelino Fernandes owned a bricklaying business and was injured after he fell from scaffolding. After his injury, Fernandes began receiving disability benefits from his long-term disability insurer. Fernandes’ doctor and his insurer provided the same medical opinion: he would not return to work.

Fernandes’ insurer then conducted three days of surveillance on him in August 2005. During that time, Fernandes was observed shoveling dirt and using a wheelbarrow in his backyard for approximately 90 minutes. After reviewing this surveillance, the insurer immediately discontinued benefits despite having medical evidence that Fernandes was completely disabled. However, it did not inform Fernandes of this decision until much later.

Fernandes attempted an unsuccessful return to work. He provided a description of the heavy duties related to his work which went unconsidered by his insurer. He continued to attend requested medical examinations. However, his insurer refused to reinstate benefits.

Fernandes eventually sued his insurer. His insurer renewed benefit payments in 2011, but refused to acknowledge his entitlement during the six-year lapse.

At trial, the court found that the August 2005 surveillance of Fernandes did not establish that he was able to work. Instead, the trial judge stated that there was never any doubt that Fernandes was disabled from performing the important daily duties of a bricklayer. In addition to damages for breach of contract and mental distress, the trial judge awarded $200,000 in punitive damages.

The punitive damages award was upheld on appeal. The insurer failed to carry out a good-faith investigation into Fernandes’ entitlement. It denied benefits without properly considering the duties of a bricklayer, without any medical evidence to support its position, and had persisted in the correctness of its decision despite renewing benefits.

Meanwhile in Nova Scotia, the decision of Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. v. Brine [2014] N.S.J. No. 328, sets out a laundry list of acts carried out by a long-term disability insurer which amounted to unfair treatment of its insured.

Bruce Brine was a police officer. In 1995, Brine was diagnosed with severe depression. He made a claim with his insurer for disability benefits. Brine’s insurer paid benefits and for him to attend a vocational rehabilitation counsellor, something not covered by the policy but done at the discretion of the insurer. He was eventually found to be totally disabled.

In 1998, Brine’s insurer alleged that over a period of years Brine had received undisclosed CPP and other disability benefits retroactive to 1996, resulting in a substantial overpayment. The insurer immediately halted ongoing benefit payments to offset his CPP payments, and also halted Brine’s vocational rehabilitation services without explanation. In 1999, Brine filed for bankruptcy. Once discharged, he claimed that the overpayments relied upon by his insurer to offset his claim were wiped clean. Brine’s insurer disagreed and only resumed benefit payments in 2003.

The disputes brought Brine and his insurer before the courts. At trial, Brine’s insurer was found in the wrong for refusing to acknowledge that Brine’s 1999 bankruptcy wiped clean most of the overpayment, and in any event should have prorated repayment between the date of discovery and Brine’s 65th birthday.

However, the conduct of Brine’s insurer before and at trial was found to violate its duty of good faith for the following reasons:
  • Brine was forced to go to the Tax Court of Canada on several occasions because his insurer persisted in wrongly treating his disability benefits as taxable income. The insurer maintained this position up until the date of trial, causing Brine unreasonable financial hardship.
  • Cancelling Brine’s vocational rehabilitation services without considering what impact it might have upon Brine was unreasonable.
  • The insurer failed to disclose a 2003 medical examination into Brine’s psychiatric health until the week before his trial without providing explanation, which the court interpreted to be an attempt to obtain a better bargaining position.
  • At trial, the insurer presented a witness who tried to “paint” Brine as having concealed his application for CPP benefits, despite the insurance file having shown otherwise.
The court ordered Brine’s insurer to credit him with the overpayment equal to the amount expunged by his 1999 bankruptcy, and also awarded Brine damages for the mental distress. In addition, Brine was awarded $150,000 in aggravated damages and $500,000 in punitive damages to reflect the magnitude of the insurer’s breach of its duty of good faith owed to a vulnerable insured suffering from mental illness.

Industrial Alliance Insurance and Fernandes highlight a number of actions which may prompt a trial judge to award mental distress damages as well as pecuniary damages.

Long-term disability insurers should take note that a single piece of surveillance evidence should not justify maintaining a denial of benefits in the face of unchallenged medical evidence demonstrating the insured’s disability. Likewise, trial judges will disapprove of the insurer applying financial pressure and withholding evidence to incentivize an insured to settle.

Matthew Pearn (@PearnMatthew) is an associate lawyer with Foster & Company in Fredericton, N.B., practising in the areas of personal injury and insurance defence.

Source: http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/index.php?section=article&articleid=2294
 

Imaging study finds first evidence of neuroinflammation in brains of chronic pain patients

By on  

 A new study from Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) investigators has

found, for the first time, evidence of neuroinflammation in key regions of the

brains of patients with chronic pain. By showing that levels of an inflammation-

linked protein are elevated in regions known to be involved in the transmission

of pain, the study published online in the journalBrain paves the way for the

exploration of potential new treatment strategies and identifies a possible way

around one of the most frustrating limitations in the study and treatment of

chronic pain – the lack of an objective way to measure the presence or intensity

of pain.

Source and  more: http://www.psypost.org/2015/01/imaging-study-finds-first-evidence-neuroinflammation-brains-chronic-pain-patients-30902

 

FAIR will be on the CBC Ontario Today show

FAIR will be on the CBC Ontario Today show Wednesday, January 21 at 12 pm
 
 At issue is what car insurers and extended health insurers put legitimate claimants through in order to deny their benefits. Jokelee Vanderkop, author of  ’So You Think You’re Covered! The Insurance Industry Rip-Off’, an all-too-real story about her 12 year long battle for benefits and her odyssey through Ontario’s dysfunctional auto insurance system, discusses her experiences. Rhona DesRoches, Chair of FAIR will be on an open talk line to answer questions about the thousands of seriously injured people with medically valid claims who are denied access to benefits.
 
You can find the Ontario Today show at 99.1 or 100.9 or 93.5 (check online for your area) or you can listen online. The call-in number is 1-888 817 8995. Online http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/
_______________________________________________________________

Hundreds of hospital privacy violations go unreported

Privacy Commissioner Brian Beamish calls for changes in law to require hospitals to reveal breaches to his office.

Brian Beamish, Ontario's acting privacy commissioner, is calling for changes in legislation to make it harder for hospitals to handle privacy breaches internally without reporting them to the privacy office.
Vince Talotta / Toronto Star Order this photo
 
Brian Beamish, Ontario's acting privacy commissioner, is calling for changes in legislation to make it harder for hospitals to handle privacy breaches internally without reporting them to the privacy office. 

Five staff members snooped into the medical records of 22 patients at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health last year.

A clinician from St. Michael’s Hospital posted an inappropriate comment on Facebook about a patient’s behaviour during a healthcare procedure.

While standing in line for pizza, a Toronto East General Hospital doctor chatted on his cellphone about the private details of a patient, unaware the patient’s relative was in the same line.

These are just three examples among what may be thousands of serious health-related privacy violations that go unreported each year to the provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner.

Nearly all of the 218 privacy breaches uncovered in documents obtained by the Star — which occurred at just eight of Toronto’s biggest health institutions — were not reported because of a legislative loophole that allows hospitals to handle such violations internally.

When the Star provided some examples of unreported cases to acting privacy commissioner Brian Beamish, he called for a legislative change to force hospitals to report serious breaches of personal health information.
“I definitely think it’s worth looking at. People are very protective of their health information, and when this type of thing happens it’s a very personal intrusion — people feel violated,” Beamish said.

Michael Crystal, a lawyer currently representing thousands of patients in five major privacy class actions against Ontario hospitals, backed the commissioner’s call for legislative change.

“This is a very, very significant problem that is common in many Ontario hospitals,” he said.

Privacy breaches can range from loose lips in the coffee line to more odious examples, where hospital employees maliciously access sensitive medical information relating to abortions, suicide attempts or queries into sexual re-assignment surgery, Crystal said.

Some of Crystal’s clients have been “devastated” to learn that their records were inappropriately accessed, he said.

One patient was in hiding from her abusive husband and believed he had bribed a hospital employee to access her personal information and learn which shelter she was staying in. Some of Crystal’s clients have even been reluctant to return to the hospital for much-needed care after being told that staff members had looked at their records without authorization.

Crystal said it should be “mandatory for hospitals to report all privacy leaks,” especially as the aging population grows more dependent upon healthcare providers.

Under the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) hospitals may handle privacy violations internally, including disciplining and sometimes sacking staff members, without alerting the commission.

The three serious privacy breaches listed above all resulted in disciplinary action. Four of the snooping staff members from CAMH were suspended without pay, the documents show. A fifth received a disciplinary letter.

If hospitals were obligated under law to report privacy violations, the commission would be able to identify trends, investigate specific areas of concern and help hospitals prevent future incidents, Beamish said.

There are 155 hospitals in Ontario, and every year the commission receives roughly 400 notifications of health-related privacy breaches.

The Star’s request under the Freedom of Information Act unveiled 218 violations in just eight Toronto institutions, so “the math tells you [the number of unreported violations] is going to be in the thousands,” Beamish said.

Last year, the Star unveiled two major hospital privacy breach cases involving thousands of patients. In one case, hospitals inappropriately provided patient information to baby photographers. In another, hospitals were handing out patient contact information to RESP marketers. The commission was notified of both of these privacy breaches, probably because they affected thousands of patients and because the hospitals were seeking guidance as to how to respond, Beamish said.

A St. Michael’s Hospital spokesperson said in the Facebook incident, the commission wasn’t notified because “we consult with the privacy commissioner’s office as guidance is required … or to ensure we are in continuing compliance with the law.” The hospital didn’t feel it needed such advice in this case.
In the documents obtained by the Star, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre reported 27 privacy breaches where patient information was either stolen, lost, provided to the wrong people or disclosed without consent — and it notified the commission of none.

In one case, an employee disclosed a patient’s prognosis to the person’s estranged children, without consent, and in another the parents of an infant arrived at the neonatal intensive care unit carrying a different baby’s medical report.

Toronto East General Hospital reported 16 privacy violations whereby personal health information was inappropriately accessed or shared without consent. It notified the commission on only two occasions.

The hospital’s unreported incidents included the clinician who discussed a patient’s treatment options while waiting for pizza, an employee who asked a colleague to access the records of a friend, and a staff member who called the wrong family to tell them to come to the hospital to say goodbye to a “declining patient.”

A Star review found the majority of the 218 hospital privacy breaches were the result of genuine human error, but one in five cases were intentional and resulted in serious disciplinary action, the documents show.

Beamish said such violations, where clinicians “knew they shouldn’t be doing what they were doing and they still went ahead and did it anyway,” were the worst.

He was aware of one “love triangle” case where a nurse accessed the medical records of her ex-boyfriend’s new partner, and others where health professionals accessed colleagues’ and neighbours’ records out of curiosity.

Two similar, high-profile examples are that of former mayor Rob Ford, whose medical records were improperly read by hospital staff after his shocking cancer diagnosis, and the dozen staff members at Brampton Civic Hospital who were caught prying into the medical file of a 20-year-old man who committed suicide under hospital care.

Beamish fears that if such breaches aren’t contained, the public might lose confidence in the health sector’s ability to protect confidential information in the future.

This could lead to patients withholding information from doctors and hinder public acceptance of a shift toward electronic health records.

Online health records could be very beneficial to patients, but “people need to have confidence in the system,” he said.

Medical records are “incredibly personal” and hospitals should give as much prominence to protecting privacy as they do to hygiene campaigns, Beamish said.

“You can see a lot of signs and posters about making sure you wash your hands in hospitals, but they should take that same approach for privacy,” he said.
The University Health Network (UHN), which is responsible for four major hospitals in Toronto, reported 132 privacy incidents in 2014.

These included giving patients wristbands with the wrong identification, a staff member leaving a “detailed” message for a patient on the wrong voicemail, and the posting of two images to UHN’s public Facebook album containing patient names and medical record numbers.

Other examples:

UHN called a funeral home to ask them to search the morgue for a deceased patient’s misplaced medical chart

A clinical trial investigator unintentionally hit “reply all” on a confidential email, sending it to non-hospital staff

A staff member disclosed the date and time of a hospital appointment to the patient’s employer.

Health-related privacy violations are governed under PHIPA, legislation that allows for fining individuals up to $50,000 and institutions up to $250,000 if found guilty.

Only one prosecution has been logged so far under the act, which was introduced in 2004, and last year Beamish told the Star he wanted serious breaches to result in more prosecutions to deter nosy health professionals.
Since then, the commission has met with the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care to discuss the issue and work out who is responsible for “getting the prosecutions going,” Beamish said.

He hopes to have a prosecution plan in place within the next few months.
Minister of Health and Long Term Care Dr. Eric Hoskins said last year’s election stalled the government’s attempt to pass the Electronic Personal Health Information Act, legislation that would further safeguard patient information.
“We promised during that election to reintroduce the bill, and we’ll be doing just that,” he told the Star via email.

The new legislation would provide considerable opportunities to strengthen privacy protection over health records.

“Even one privacy breach is too many, and we will continue to work across the health sector to ensure that the personal health information of Ontarians is protected,” Hoskins said.

Olivia Carville can be reached at ocarville@thestar.ca 


Source: http://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2015/01/13/hundreds_of_hospital_privacy_violations_go_unreported.html#
 


FCAD hosts panel blasting Health Canada on transparency


medical_secrets-11
Photo: Andrei Pora

By Gabriela Panza-Beltrandi

The Faculty of Communication and Design presented a panel Tuesday on the code of silence surrounding Canada’s healthcare system, exploring how Health Canada and various quasi-public agencies obstruct journalists and the public from getting access to vital information about health and health care in Canada.

Rob Cribb, an investigative reporter at the Toronto Star and Ryerson journalism instructor, spoke at the panel about his personal experiences trying to access information from these organizations. He explained that one of the biggest obstacles to gaining access to vital information about health and health care in Canada is the Quality of Care Information Protection Act (QCIPA).

“QCIPA is essentially a blanket exemption hospitals can use to limit the information they are mandated to provide to the public,” said Cribb.

Because of this act, requests for information filed by journalists or members of the public can take months if not years to be answered (if their request is not denied altogether), and Cribb explained how many times, the final information that is not censored and delivered contains no relevant data.

“The reason it’s so tough is that the system is gauged against us… It’s set up to ensure secrecy,” said Cribb whom suggested 99 per cent of complaints and concerns concerning negligence filed to the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons are kept from the public.

Aside from these rare cases, the panel spoke about how a major problem in Canada is its difficulty to hold anyone accountable because of how hidden information is.

Joel Lexchin, an emergency physician at the University Health Network and a professor in the School of Health Policy and Management at York University, explained why transparency is important in regards to Health Canada, especially with the way it regulates prescription medication.

“The information Health Canada [sees about drugs] is not also seen by independent scientists,” said Lexchin. “This is no real way to know how good a job the people at Health Canada are doing… Without somebody else being able to look at that data, we have no idea.”

Lexchin said that with the limits Canada gives drug companies and Health Canada on how much they can approve to be revealed, many important details are left out.

Drug companies have to supply Health Canada with  information to get their drugs on the market; results of animal tests, lab tests, and human tests. Health Canada reviews the drug before approving or denying it, but the public does not get to see these comments from the reviewers explaining their decisions, and we don’t know the names of the drugs Health Canada did not approve to be released.

Lexchin says releasing this information is vital to give doctors a better knowledge of exactly what drugs they are prescribing patients, instead of just the minimal information drug companies provide them with.

“Doctors need to get objective information… That information is in the reviews that Health Canada had done about the product, but we don’t get those reviews.”

In some cases, researchers have had to turn to the U.S.’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gather information about drugs used in Canada because of how much easier that access is granted across the border.

“No one in Canada seems to care about it,” said Cribb. “The United States would have been outraged about this kind of security. In Canada, we smile and nod, and we say ‘oh well.’ and too often frankly, journalists do that… we don’t challenge these ridiculous delays and denials.”

He added: “There really are no checks and balances on [the industry] other than us. The only thing that strikes a moment of fear in the heart of a drug CEO… is an impending story to be published on the front page… If we’re not doing that, then there is no other check and balance that puts the public’s interest first.”

Source: http://theeyeopener.com/2015/01/fcad-hosts-panel-blasting-health-canada-on-transparency/

One-third of social security tribunal members have ties to Conservatives

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Baloney Meter: social security tribunal


Minister of Employment and Social Development Jason Kenney speaks at an event in Ottawa on October 2, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick -
Minister of Employment and Social Development Jason Kenney speaks at an event in Ottawa on October 2, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
— image credit: 
 by  Canadian Press - BC Local News posted Dec 4, 2014 at 6:00 AM— updated Dec 5, 2014 at 5:30 AM
By Lee-Anne Goodman, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA - "I am told that the pension appeals board did not share information on their backlog, their inventory, with (Human Resources Skills Development Canada) at the time that we transitioned to the social security tribunal, so this was an unexpected legacy backlog." — Employment and Social Development Minister Jason Kenney in a parliamentary committee hearing on Nov. 27, 2014.

The Conservative government has been under fire in recent weeks for a growing backlog of 11,000 social security cases, most involving ailing or injured Canadians denied Canada Pension Plan disability benefits and waiting for their appeals to be heard.

Those in a holding pattern include terminal cancer patients and Canadians in such dire financial straits that they're contemplating suicide, according to social security tribunal "crisis files" obtained via the Access to Information Act.

Was the government really unaware of the true extent of the existing backlog, even as it set up a new appeals system and made decisions on how to allocate staff and resources to its new tribunal?

Spoiler alert: The Canadian Press Baloney Meter is a dispassionate examination of political statements culminating in a ranking of accuracy on a scale of "no baloney" to "full of baloney" (complete methodology below).
This one earns a rating of "some baloney" — the statement is partly accurate but important details are missing

THE FACTS

The social security tribunal was launched on April 1, 2013.
The goal was to streamline the social security appeals process with 74 full-time members, and to save taxpayers $25 million a year by replacing four separate boards with a single panel.

Those boards employed 1,000 part-time referees to hear appeals from people denied employment insurance, CPP disability and old-age security benefits. Most of the 1,000 referees under the old system were dismissed when the new tribunal was established.

In testimony before various parliamentary committees over the past two years, government officials have said they determined that 74 full-time tribunal members and some part-time staffers could sufficiently replace those 1,000 part-timers after assessing caseloads under the old system.
As far back as 2009-10, there was a 1,000-case backlog of CPP disability cases, according to a report by the office of the commissioner of review tribunals.

And in the annual report of the Canada Pension Plan for the past two years, there's been evidence the backlog has been growing. The review tribunals office received 5,297 CPP disability appeals in 2012-2013, but held just 3,201 hearings.

The numbers were similar in 2011-12.

Some Canadians have waited as long as five years to have their appeals heard.

WHAT THEY SAY

Benoit Long, an assistant deputy minister at Employment and Social Development (formerly HRDC), was asked at a Senate committee hearing last month if the backlog problem existed prior to 2013.

"There would have been backlogs, yes," he said.

But Long added that the initial transfer to the new tribunal of 7,000 cases was "much higher than anticipated."

"Volume started to increase and activities started to decrease given the fact that there was a transition from one tribunal to another," he testified.
"That led to a significant number of cases that were transferred over to the tribunal, much higher than anticipated. That means that, when the tribunal started, it obviously had to start with a very large volume initially while it was still trying to ramp up, get organized and get set up."

Another department official, Eric Giguere, added: "There were backlogs, but not to this extent." Productivity levels were falling in the old system as the transition to the new tribunal approached, he reiterated.

A spokesperson for Kenney, however, said both men were testifying with the benefit of hindsight, insisting the department didn't know about the extent of the backlog when it launched the new tribunal.

David Dewhirst, a retired civil servant who represented the government for years at social security hearings, is skeptical.

"To say they didn't know is so high on the baloney meter that it defies logic," said Dewhirst.

"Everyone knew there were tremendous numbers in the backlog, all departments knew, and this information is filtered up to the minister. Everybody was aware that when 'D-Day' came, there was going to be a significant backlog, especially since everyone knew the number of appeals being heard was slowing down in the final year."

He added that case management was "impeccable" under the old system, and that caseload information was routinely passed along to the department.
And even if officials weren't getting up-to-date caseload information from those in the old system as they set up the new one, he added, "wouldn't a competent government ask those questions?"

THE VERDICT

Kenney may very well have been "dismayed" to learn about the size of the backlog when being briefed about the social security tribunal when he took over the department from Diane Finley in the summer of 2013.

But officials in his own department have testified publicly that a backlog already existed prior to the launch of the tribunal, although they say department officials didn't know how hefty it was. Canada Pension Plan statistics also show a pre-existing backlog of disability appeals.

A longtime government representative at tribunal hearings also says the government was always kept abreast of caseload.

For these reasons, Kenney's statement that the backlog was "unexpected" and that the government wasn't told about the backlogged cases contains "some baloney."

METHODOLOGY

The Baloney Meter is a project of The Canadian Press that examines the level of accuracy in statements made by politicians. Each claim is researched and assigned a rating based on the following scale:

No baloney — the statement is completely accurate

A little baloney — the statement is mostly accurate but more information is required

Some baloney — the statement is partly accurate but important details are missing

A lot of baloney — the statement is mostly inaccurate but contains elements of truth

Full of baloney — the statement is completely inaccurate
———
SOURCES

Testimony to the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, Wednesday, Nov. 5:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/sencommitteebusiness/Notice.aspx?parl=41&ses=2&comm_id=1013&Language=E&meeting_id=400568
Testimony to the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, May 17, 2012
http://openparliament.ca/committees/finance/41-1/60/?page=13
David Dewhirst, former Service Canada official employed contractually as a government representative at social security review tribunals for Service Canada
Annual Report of the Canada Pension Plan, 2012-2013 and 2011-2012:
http://www.esdc.gc.ca/en/reports/pension/cpp_reports/2013/cpp_report.page
http://www.esdc.gc.ca/en/reports/pension/cpp_reports/2012/cpp_report.page?#h2.4
Annual Report of the Office of the Commissioner or Review Tribunal, 2008-2009: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2013/bctr-ocrt/HS55-2009-eng.pdf

Source: http://www.mapleridgenews.com/national/284736831.html