A lot more, if you were to pay attention to media reports. Over the last few years, all across Canada there has been much writing and talk about shortages of family MDs. The College of Family Physicians of Canada says that there are about 4 million Canadians without a family doctor (there is an obvious interest in demonstrating shortage as it results in the need for more members). If you do think of the wait time to see a doctor, you might in fact also conclude that there are physician shortages.
While I cannot challenge the fact that 4,000,000 Canadians may be without a family MD, but on a per person basis, the claim for shortage of doctors does not seem to make sense. It just does not add up! There could be issues in rural communities that are limited in terms of access. But on sheer numbers, there is a gross miscalculation. Let us look at the issue a bit more closely.
For roughly 33 million Canadians, there are approximately 28,000 Primary Care Physicians (does not even consider Nurse Practitioners). This comes down to about one MD per 1150 Canadians. This may seem high. But, if one were to assume 1500 hours of patient care time (very conservative, most full time employees work roughly 2000 hours including vacation time), an average visit of 30 minutes (again VERY conservative) will be equivalent to about 3000 visits per doctor. This means that a doctor can see a person at the least 2.5 times a year. Now, factoring in those of us who have a family doctor but only visit annually (or myself where it has been 8 years), I FAIL to see the logic behind the implied shortages. I concede that I may not have all of the facts and my calculations are simplistic. For this reason, I am open to inputs and would like to be corrected.
A recent press release in Ontario claims that 800,000 Ontarians do not have a family physician. This stat was released by the Ontario Medical Association (OMA) that incidentally is in the midst of negotiating a contract with the Ontario Government. I pulled out my trusted calculator and came up with virtually the same doctor to patient ratio as previously calculated. (13million Ontarians, 11,400 Family Docs, is 1140 patients per doctor). Per OMA’s numbers, there are 800,000 patients without a doctor, and the system is short by 2500 doctors. Assuming that 51.3% of the doctors are Family Doctors ( Canadian Institute for Health Information states that 51.3% of 2006 doctors were family doctors), the OMA is suggesting that we are short on family doctors by about 1300, which if filled would create a ratio of 1 doctor per 600 patients. Using previous formula of 30-minute visits and 1500 hours of clinic time, each patient would be seen 5 times a year.
This, on the average seems a bit excessive. We are being misled by special interest groups. These Professional Interest Groups who produce these statistics for the betterment of themselves, are holding us hostage to their interests? This is wrong. It is like giving Prisoners a key to the prison. In fact, as a Nurse, my own association is using the same logic to try to boost membership. Though they are focusing on creating full time positions (except that many of the Nurses I work with would prefer part-time to full-time).
Now, don’t get me wrong, I am not against physicians. It’s not the professionals I have issue with, it is with the special interest groups that use scare tactics to boost membership.
We have a serious productivity as well as economic issues if we actually have enough MDs and they are failing to see 4 million Canadians (this alone could account for significant cost savings!). Why not enforce a fulltime equivalent minimum patient list of say 1500 patients. This would immediately solve this perceived issue of physician shortage and at the same time will have more cost effective options of managing primary care. Which, incidentally, will reduce the overall burden on the rest of the system. WHY NOT!
About the Author: Jamie Marcellus is a Registered Nurse Executive with experience in healthcare sales, operations and process improvement in both the public and the private healthcare sectors in Canada.
Editor: BIPRO Health, a leading provider of solutions to all healthcare needs: Clinical Quality, speed of Care, Asset Utilization, Pay for Performance, etc. For details, please visit www.biproinc.com/healthcare_services.html





17 users commented in " How Many More Physicians Do We Really Need? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackJamie, I take issue with a couple of your comments and would like to offer a possible reason for the marketing efforts to enlist new physicians.
What’s important to know is that my only relationship with healthcare providers is that I am a consumer. Period. I’m no expert and I have no vested interest in promoting any viewpoint on the topic.
I say this because I tend to agree with any healthcare industry promotional material that claims that there is a need for more physicians. There are a number of reasons that this kind of “propoganda” is important.
The biggest reason is that it acts as a means of recruiting new students into the profession. You will see the same kind of push for teachers or any other public servant/worker. As population grows, the need for any worker in these professions grows. When industries such as healthcare or education see a slip in the enrollment of students in a particular profession (especially one that requires highly technical skills and therefore extended education), you will see a big push for a renewed interest in that profession. It may not be completely accurate, but it is advertising and it does serve an important purpose.
Upon looking through your, admittedly liberal, statics, I couldn’t help but remember a rather depressing day in Physics in college. We were studying the “rule of 7s” which claims that things that follow a natural logarithmic growth cycle see a doubling effect every 7 units of time. So, applying this rule, we calculated the rate of population growth for the planet and found a naturally occurring logarithmic growth cycle. Applying the math further we were able to conclude that the rate of population growth (which itself is growing at a logarithmic pace) results in the population of the world doubling every 7 years. Even such horrible events as the plague didn’t have much of an effect on the growth.
The reason I bring this up is encapsulated by my professor’s opening question: If we agree on a number that represents the total capacity of people on earth and we claim that the earth is at half of that capacity, how many years will the earth be around before it is at 100% capacity: answer is 7. Shocking.
So, I ask you this: if you want the same ratio of physicians to customers and we know that the number of customers will double in 7 years, how many physicians is that? Now compare that number to the number of students in colleges that could possibly fit those needs. I think you will find that there aren’t enough students to become qualified physicians for twice the population even if you converted the entire student body to physicians.
And the last thing that I think you should consider is that if you give each physician a “quota”, you are most likely going to lower the quality of service each physician is able to provide. Furthermore, if you are working your physicians too hard, they will pack up and leave. Then, how will you get students to want to become shackled and enslaved physicians all because you object to the propoganda machine that has at their disposal a great deal of data and an astounding ability to predict future needs.
Normally I would agree 100% with the idea that public service announcements or mass media manipulation for most topics is bogus and patently void of any merit, but this time, I am afraid that the truth is: without some effective tool to increase public interest in becoming a healthcare professional, we are going to have problems soon.
Being a nurse, you can imagine how your quality of life would be greatly diminished if suddenly you had a 4000 patient quota and by simple virtue of government or business mandate, you had to provide less service to people who really needed you…
I have the greatest respect for the professionals in the industry and although I hear your claim that we are being fed statistics that are inaccurate, I am afraid that I disagree with the motivations behind these statistics.
Best wishes,
jase
Jase,
Thank you for the feedback. Your comments are valid and well appreciated. I am interested in the debate, and would like to hear what others have to say. I think the best thing we can do to improve healthcare is to debate it, talk about it, and try to learn as much as possible. Thanks again, and I will be the first to admit that I am not the expert!
Kindly,
Jamie
well, we certainly need pediatric allergists here in philadelphia. two hospitals seem to have them and one has a waiting list 5 months long for a new appointment.
Brilliant minds at work here. Recently I heard a comment comparing the two major political parties in the U.S. It was said that the Republicans are dealing in facts while the Democrats are dealing in emotion. Communication is difficult at best. Reading Jamie’s line it certainly makes sense, because I also view any claim by media with suspicion. Jase’s mild rebuke is spot on, but how does it move us toward a solution? On top of the obvious problems we have in the States, Canada has the Ogre of Government run healthcare. This site trumpets Six Sigma techniques. SS is loosely based on Dr. Deming’s work. Deming favored introducing competition into the healthcare system. MRIs are but one example. A new MRI is opened by a group of doctors. What is charged for an MRI has NO basis in reality. None. The last one I had took 6 minutes and $2350 was billed to my insurance co. There was no co-pay. The $2350 exists as the price because insurance is so high. Round and round. Find a way to make the MRI purely a business venture (a M.D. for reading, of course) and the price, based on the cost the equipment, office rental, staff, etc, would be high at $400. More people would have them so prevention would improve, insurance rates would start down. Who moves first? There are thousands of systems that we need to deal with, but let’s look at ALL of healthcare as one system. We can’t, because we don’t have a healthcare system. What we have is healthcare procedures. You can’t have a system without an overriding AIM. There must be an aim, that aim must be to make life better for the “customer”, the patient must be the central focus. Were all the players to focus on the aim, there would be cooperation, and huge strides could be made.
Jamie,
Interesting observation. I also see Jase’s viewpoint. I think that though your article is focussed on present shortage and what Jase is talking is future shortages.
I recall years back, AMA used to infact discourage and send out messages that we have too many doctors (just hearsay though).
If I take your assumption of 50% physicians are family practice, then in US you have about 1 doctor per 700 person. And still when you want to make an appointment, you get in queue.
I also know that the appointments are 15 to 30 minutes. So if doctors are churning out so many patients, mathematics shows sufficiency, then what is leading to the wait time, shortage, etc.
I wonder if any one has a total picture of the situation.
Good analysis.
Jamie,
From my personal observations, there are shortages of specialized medical professionals in Canada but as you have mentioned, healthcare needs to look at patients and their well-being before looking at productivity rate per doctor/nurse.
I think that by providing proper equipment (I am referring to patients transferred from one bed to another in a CAT scan room- 6 people moving one person) resources can be reallocated to other hospitals/areas.
Hospitals have not been designed to free up nurses and doctors but to create more blockages in the way they currently operate.
Obviously, time studies should be performed but having in mind that we are the “patients” and we do not deal with automotive environment where managers can be easily replaced with another manager who knows how to “squeeze” resources.
I know of patients with healthcare problems who are verbally and physically abusive towards nurses so it is important to understand that their work conditions have to be maintained at proper quality standard because we cannot replace a nurse as fast as we can replace a machine operator.
I will not even refer to doctors right now.
Thank you,
Dorina
If you have waited in an Emergency Room (recent news accounts have shown people dying in ER’s waiting over 20 hours), looked for a practicing Ob/Gyn in an large city or sought “HiTech” medical diagnostics in remote locations it should be obvious we need more. This seems further confounded by a distribution problem. The real question might be how do we develop the economic model to allow market forces bring about the desired result — better medical capability everywhere at an affordable cost to patients and at compensation level that attracts the best practitioners and encourages ongoing technological advances. There are plenty of proposals in every election year on how to that and the recent rhetoric form all sides is giving me a migraine that I cannot afford to treat properly !! However, I haven’t found one that meets all the criteria — yet.
I read the blog. Assuming there are ‘enough’ doctors [implying that having more than enough is somehow undesirable], the problem is that we do not have enough doctors in some areas [e.g. rural communities] and an overabundance in other areas [presumably urban settings].
The next issue is that of specialization. I don’t want an OB-Gyn doing my back surgery. Therefore, it is not simply a matter of having enough doctors, it is having the right number of specialists in the right geographic locations… which is an ongoing problem.
One thing I know is that we need more doctors than Lawyers! =)
I’m not privy to experience with the Canadian health care system, but feel valid points were brought up here. By my experience I would say there is definitely a long wait for the attention of a specialist, whether it be pediatric or otherwise.
I’m wondering regarding the math, Jamie seemed very clear in how he reached his calculations, however I don’t see it if he allotted time for necessary research, paperwork, and continued education which of course all professional service areas now have to complete for license maintenance, in the US anyway.
I’ve been both types of patient, that which only walks in every other year, and that which needed frequent, close attention. Even in the first case, I personally would want to know that the doctor would be able to give me more than an hour and a half (2.5 visits a year @ 30 min) during the entire year! In most cases I feel the doctor spent more time on me and my concerns than that!
As a service coordinator specialist serving children, I have had to visit doctors in their office to discuss a mutual clients needs, sometimes the office manager is able to assist me, but other times a doctor is needed. This is also an important part of patient care; conferring with other professionals to best serve all the needs of the patient, particularly in pediatrics and I would think, geriatrics in general, as well as other areas I might not be considering.
Lastly, I would point out that the calculated scheduling leaves little time for a doctor to volunteer his services outside the alloted time practice. Many of us are familiar with programs in which medical professionals generously volunteer their services (sometimes several weeks at a stretch) in poorer countries in need. I think we can agree their service is to be commended and respected, even when it takes them away from us- the “paying customer”.
Is there a shortage or is it hype? It would seem from replies the general consensus is there seems to be a shortage of specialists more so than primary physicians. Though I’m sure it’s being hyped up by the special interests also, it doesn’t make it less a concern.
A major problem is geographical distribution. It’s easy to find a psychiatrist, say, in New York City. How about in rural areas? How about other doctors in impoverished areas? A physician can complete school with hundreds of thousands in debt: s/he’s not going to want to move to a place where s/he can’t meet debt service, malpractice payments AND enjoy building a life. That’s a big problem.
All I know is, my doctor moved from a small facility, where I was seen within 20 minutes of my scheduled appointment, to a larger facility, and I am lucky to get in within an hour of my appointment time. Not only that, to see my primary care physician, I have to make the appointment 90 days in advance, where I used to be able to see him anytime I needed. I now see his physician’s assistant when I am sick and only see my physician when I am in for a well checkup.
Yes, we need more physicians!
Well the ideal is probably one “medical expert artificial intelligence” per person, a long way to go from here. Human physicians may be a harder question, one per hundred, one per fifty… enough to maintain the future computerized systems and world demographics.
Lots more.
We need many more than we currently have. We also need changes (like tort reform) to incentivize talent to pursue avocations in medicine. In PA, OBGYNs are fleeing the state for more balanced legal environments.
In a matured managed care environment, like the one we have here in metro-Philadelphia, doctors are told what services to provide by RN’s at managed care companies, have limited upside income and are incentivized to spend as little time as possible with patients.
Additionally, doctors and hospitals are required to deliver a slate of “defensive” tests and treatments to avoid lawsuits, slowing the healthcare delivery process for everyone and adding costs exponentially.
Despite these limitations, some doctors continue to provide life-saving and life-affirming services, often against their economic self-interest.
Are you proposing we have less doctors? If so, don’t dare come to Philadelphia, get sick and have to wait in an urban ER; you might begin to see things differently.
In some regions there are definite shortages and in some practices like pediatrics and family practice as well.
I think we may have enough specialists and could also use more hollistic docs.
In my opinion – too many.
If we invested a lot more in health instead of only treatment, everyone would be better off. Except the pharmaceutical companies.
General health is deteriorating globally due to lifestyle choices (as unconscious and marketing-indoctrinated as they may be) and it creates a breeding ground for the multi-trillion dollar business that we euphemistically call “health care” – although a more correct term such as “bio-repair” or “bio-maintenance” would be more appropriate…lol.
Until this trend is reversed, we will “need’ more and more physicians. And since you need a Master’s level education to map symptoms to pharmaceuticals, it’s a very expensive development.
LoL..I suppose that was a bit of a rant..I have nothing against physicians..they are no worse or better than everyone else. It just irks me because it’s essentially it’s like trying to cure a man who keeps bumping his head against a wall over and over again…by buying more and more band-aids.
I think we need more quality physicians. I don’t like feeling like a number instead of a person or waiting 2 hours past an appointment time because a doctor over books. I love my doctor now, she never over books and takes time to talk it out, not just poo poo it or hand me a pill. I think we need more PA’s and RN’s too
Leave A Reply