There is no disputing the need to make the health service more efficient and increase productivity but the carrot and stick approach being adopted by Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly in respect of consultant posts is something of a new departure.
The Minister has announced that in the budget for 2025 new consultant posts will be prioritised for large hospitals in cases where consultants were performing a similar volume of outpatient appointments to their peers in other hospitals. The measure is intended to incentivise hospitals to speed up implementing reforms and efficiency measures to cut outpatient waiting lists and is one of the key metrics to be used in deciding where money will be spent. *
It is set against a background of stubbornly high outpatient waiting lists and spiralling costs across the whole system. More than 400,000 people are currently waiting longer than the 10-week target for an outpatient appointment while the Government has had to provide an additional €1.5 billion in health funding this year on top of the €22.5 billion allowed in the budget. An additional €1.2 billion has also been built into next year’s budget just to maintain existing service levels.
This situation is not sustainable and fresh approaches are needed. The idea of linking further investment to current performance is superficially attractive. Donnelly argues that that the number of outpatients seen in hospitals per consultant has fallen by almost 30 per cent since 2016. He believes that had outpatient activity per consultant in acute hospitals last year been at the same level as in 2016, more than 1.4 million additional appointments could have taken place.
The best crime fiction of 2024: Robert Harris, Jane Casey, Joe Thomas, Kellye Garrett, Stuart Neville and many more
We’re heading for the second biggest fiscal disaster in the history of the State
Housing in Ireland is among the most expensive and most affordable in the EU. How does that happen?
Ceann comhairle election key task as 34th Dáil convenes for first time
The Irish Medical Organisation, which represents hospital doctors, has been quick to identify the main flaw in this data driven approach which is the difficulty of comparing one hospital with another. They highlighted numerous factors that could affect consultants’ productivity such as access to clinics, the complexity of treatment required, and access to diagnostics, beds and theatres. The IMO could be expected to make such arguments but there is a clear issue around the use of crude measures to decide where investment should go.
There are also ethical and clinical issues, namely the allocation of funding to hospitals that produce the best numbers rather that those with the greatest need. The danger of fostering a culture in which hospitals focus more on numbers of patients seen than quality of care is also obvious.
Devising a way of measuring consultant productivity that allows for all these variables would be no easy task. But it needs to be done. It is part of a wider story of fast-rising spending in health delivering sporadic results, but seemingly failing to address key issues. Some of this is due to the fast rise in the population and the increased expense of medical procedures, but ensuring better value for money remains a crunch issue.
* This paragraph has been amended from the original version to clarify that funding will be prioritised for hospitals where consultants are seeing as many outpatients as peers elsewhere, rather than only being provided in these cases.