Private health care in Canada: savior or siren?

In canada, health care is publicly insured and available to all at no charge. Recently, financial pressures have threatened the system and led to considerable debate about how to save it. One proposal is to permit privately funded health care alongside the public system, resulting in what is popularly called a two-tiered system. This paper presents some of the arguments for and against two-tiered health care. Using as an example cataract surgery-a procedure that is available both publicly and privately-the authors look at some common beliefs about private health care in Canada. They conclude that the growth in private sector cataract surgery does not appear to be related to cutbacks or rationing, that private access does not necessarily shorten waiting times, and that, contrary to popular belief, it is not only the well-to-do who pay for private surgery in Canada.

A comparison of ambulatory care and selected procedure rates in the health care systems of the Province of Manitoba, Canada; Kaiser Permanente Health Maintenance Organization; and the United States.

To determine if there are differences in physician services in different health care systems, we compared ambulatory visit rates and procedure rates for three surgical procedures in the province of Manitoba, Canada; Kaiser Permanente Health Maintenance Organization; and the United States. The KP system, with its single payer and low financial barriers, is not unlike the Canadian system. But, for most of the United States, the primary payment mechanism is fee-for-service, with the patient paying a significant amount, thereby militating against preventive and early primary care. Manitoba and KP data were extracted from computerized administrative records. U.S. data were obtained from publicly available reports. Manitoba provides 1.8 times and KP 1.2 times (1.4 when allied health visits are included) as many primary care physician visits as the United States. For the surgical procedures studied, U.S. rates were higher than those in either the KP HMO or in Manitoba. We conclude that (1) the U.S. system leads to more surgical intervention, and (2) removal of financial barriers leads to higher use of primary care services where more preventive and ameliorative care can occur.