Your recent medical treatment a bill FYI?

[Dr mojo]

I was contemplating whether to give Joe Public a real idea of the cost of healthcare in 2011 they should be sent a bill FYI on what their last treatment episode cost the taxpayer. Putting aside the additional bureaucracy for a moment do you think it would be
1. Useful information
2. Make us all value the NHS more

I suspect their are pros and cons but would be interested in views of PHers.

[Gaspode]

Dr mojo said:

I was contemplating whether to give Joe Public a real idea of the cost of healthcare in 2011 they should be sent a bill FYI on what their last treatment episode cost the taxpayer. Putting aside the additional bureaucracy for a moment do you think it would be
1. Useful information
2. Make us all value the NHS more

I suspect their are pros and cons but would be interested in views of PHers.

Could be useful, but I wonder if it wouldn't just be an excuse to have even more NHS administrators soaking up budget without actually providing any health care?

[66comanche]

A guilt trip on sick people, some whom would be seriously ill? A great idea, I can see it now, Dave, 25 gets back home from hospital after his 6 month stay in intensive care having lost both legs in a car accident not of his making to find a letter informing him his treatment cost the taxpayer £500,000.

I think most people how have need of the NHS, especially on a regular basis, are grateful and appreciate the service. The ones that don't certainly won't care a fig what's said in a letter about the cost of their treatment.

[ewenm]

My OH used to be a NHS administrator and often wished she was allowed to do this - no extra administration required as she needed to know a per-operation cost anyway.

[IrrElephant]

I don't see the benefit in it. If someone told me 'hey, that triple heart bypass that saved your grandads life cost the taxpayer £30k' I wouldn't give a monkeys.

[Meoricin]

66comanche said:

A guilt trip on sick people, some whom would be seriously ill? A great idea, I can see it now, Dave, 25 gets back home from hospital after his 6 month stay in intensive care having lost both legs in a car accident not of his making to find a letter informing him his treatment cost the taxpayer £500,000.

I think most people how have need of the NHS, especially on a regular basis, are grateful and appreciate the service. The ones that don't certainly won't care a fig what's said in a letter about the cost of their treatment.

I think this is pretty accurate. Those that care will be appalled by how much their treatment cost, and might be put off using it when they need it. Those that don't will probably end up viewing it as some sort of competition to 'get their tax's worth'.

Not to mention the additional costs incurred in setting up a department to deal with this, crewed mostly by managers whose only job is to tell the few actual workers what to do, and desperately squirm away from any form of responsibility the moment something goes wrong.

[jamoor]

TBF it's an insurance policy at the end of the day.

Does anyone care what it cost the insurance company, that's what it's there for.

[Six Fiend]

I know how much my various prescribed drugs cost, how much my inpatient care costs etc.

Keeping me alive is a costly business.

I give back as best I can doing voluntary stuff (including being on new build consulting groups) in the hospital and helping with medical studies etc. I also turn up to all my appointments and do what the medics tell me. I try to stay alive!

[mph1977]

Gaspode said:

Dr mojo said:

I was contemplating whether to give Joe Public a real idea of the cost of healthcare in 2011 they should be sent a bill FYI on what their last treatment episode cost the taxpayer. Putting aside the additional bureaucracy for a moment do you think it would be
1. Useful information
2. Make us all value the NHS more

I suspect their are pros and cons but would be interested in views of PHers.

Could be useful, but I wonder if it wouldn't just be an excuse to have even more NHS administrators soaking up budget without actually providing any health care?

the sums exist , perhaps not down to the value of all consumables used on the wards , and where ward stock drugs and fluids are used instead of it being supplied against a named patient request.

but there's a day rate for acute Beds Level 0-3 and a rate for intermediate care beds, everything used in Operations and procedures similar to operations ( e.g. endoscopies., angio, interventional radiology) is accounted for so producing the 'bill' there is easy.
inpatient and TTO drugs dispensed are recorded on pharmacy systems ...
therapy input is recorded but whether extracting 'billing ' information is achievable in all cases will depend on the systems in use ...

[Slagathore]

I don't really think it would change anything.

Part of the reason this country is in such a state is because there are lots of people that just don't care.

If you are admitted with drunken injuries or for fighting etc, then they should be reminded of the cost. It would be nice if they were actually charged, but that will never happen.

Same for fat people and smokers. Any treatments they have as a result of being fat or a smoker, they should be charged.

I do think the costs would suprise a lot of people, but I don't think it would make them change their behaviour or habits.

[Gaspode]

Slagathore said:

Same for fat people and smokers. Any treatments they have as a result of being fat or a smoker, they should be charged.

Do you believe that people should have to pay for any medical treatment as a result of their lifestyle choices, or only the ones in which you don't participate?

[ShampooEfficient]

Gaspode said:

Slagathore said:

Same for fat people and smokers. Any treatments they have as a result of being fat or a smoker, they should be charged.

Do you believe that people should have to pay for any medical treatment as a result of their lifestyle choices, or only the ones in which you don't participate?

Exactly. Given the amount of tax paid by smokers especially...

Should I be billed next time I end up cutting my fingers open accidentally?

[The_Doc]

NHS budget per year £100 billion
26 million incometax payers in tht UK

= £3800 each for us tax payers, per year


or

NHS website said:

In 2009/10 there were:

16,806,200 hospital stays, a 38 per cent rise on 1999/2000 (12,167,570)

1,939,190 stays for patients aged 0 to 14; a 15 per cent rise on 1999/2000 (1,682,020)
7,333,110 stays for patients aged 15 to 59; a 29 per cent rise on 1999/2000 (5,687,810)
3,642,940 stays for patients aged 60 to 74; a 48 per cent rise on 1999/2000 (2,463,170)
3,837,990 stays for patients aged 75 and over, a 66 per cent rise on 1999/2000 (2,308,480).

£100bill divided by 16.8mill stays

= £6000 per stay in hospital

[Stu R]

Nope, but I do think they should charge people a quid for an appointment, and more for the next one if they miss it.

The NHS is a wonderful thing, but it does rather lend itself to people taking the pee a bit because they've no out of pocket expense.

[condor]

I think their car parks earn quite a bit.

I don't think patients need to have personal itemised bills but a general cost for each procedure would be useful.
For example, I would be interested in how much a simple blood test costs. Whether it's cheaper to do lots of blood tests in one go rather than the 'that one doesn't give the result I'm after' we'll try another approach.
Similarly the cost of vaccination/medication before foreign travel being met by the patient as opposed to the patient getting a disease associated with foreign travel and not having bothered to immunise themselves.
Also interested to know how much it costs to have an ultrasound scan.

[Dr mojo]

Some interesting comments. Certainly would not wish to put people off having treatment if required but if we could change the behaviour of even 10% of the people who take the piss it might be worth considering. Clearly would need to be done in a sensitive manner.
It does surprise me that so few people understand the cost of healthcare and indeed healthcare inflation which makes it more difficult each year for the NHS to deliver the treatments that would be considered world class. Some treatments now in cancer can cost upwards of 100k a year. Yes there are inefficiencies but not as many as people glibly point out. Compared to the rest of the world it remains one of the most efficient sytems in terms of coverage for money spent. It may also help inform more grown up debate about what the NHS should pay for and what it should stop paying for. The NHS belongs to the taxpayer and they may wish to have a better understanding of how their taxes are spent?
As for lifestyle changes Even if you forget the economics for a moment trying to avoid smoking and lose weight are good for you full stop . Income from tax revenues to me is not the point.

[Gaspode]

Dr mojo said:

As for lifestyle changes Even if you forget the economics for a moment trying to avoid smoking and lose weight are good for you full stop . Income from tax revenues to me is not the point.

I don't doubt you for a second, and I do indeed refrain from smoking and watch my weight, but calls for people, whether smokers or bloaters, to be charged for their healthcare seem to be more than somewhat questionable.

Where will it stop? Drinkers charged for alcohol-related injuries? Rugby players charged for broken collarbones? Cyclists charged for skin grafts? Motorists charged for accident treatment? Fire Fighters charged for treatment of lung conditions? People with high-presure jobs charged for stress-related illnesses? Gardeners charged for poison ivy rash?

"I'm sorry sir or madam, your NHS treatment comes as a direct result of lifestyle choices you have made which resulted in health issues that could have been foreseen, so sorry, you are no longer covered free of charge. Here's a bill for X Thousand quid".

[condor]

Doing a google search for costs of NHS charges doesn't come up with any prices - a range of probable private health prices , but that's about it.
Makes you wonder what the NHS are hiding.

[SBDJ]

Stu R said:

Nope, but I do think they should charge people a quid for an appointment, and more for the next one if they miss it.

So penalise the people who need the system and in some cases are completely dependent.

Guess I'm lucky that my son has open ward access and we can bypass the GP system completely if necessary.

The last GP we saw (about a week ago) with my son said that he has never seen someone with a list of conditions like his, has no experience or advice on what we were experiencing and was happy to defer to my expertise. You want to charge me more for that than I am already paying?!

[randlemarcus]

SBDJ said:

Stu R said:

Nope, but I do think they should charge people a quid for an appointment, and more for the next one if they miss it.

So penalise the people who need the system and in some cases are completely dependent.

Guess I'm lucky that my son has open ward access and we can bypass the GP system completely if necessary.

The last GP we saw (about a week ago) with my son said that he has never seen someone with a list of conditions like his, has no experience or advice on what we were experiencing and was happy to defer to my expertise. You want to charge me more for that than I am already paying?!

Good point, well made.

Tell you what, make it £50 per apppointment, where the charge is cancelled by the NHS employee, simply by turning up. Doesn't hurt you as an outlier, doesn't discourage use of the resources by those in need. May need some tidying up around those with legitimate excuses (missed a dentists appointment myself, the morning after my father passed), but will remove the "no charge, no value" thing