As a nurse, waking up each day is a struggle knowing that there is a high risk for us to acquire the disease. However, we are constantly reminded of our duty to the people. That it is our duty and responsibility to help those in need, especially the poor, weak, and vulnerable.
Times like this make us realize that effective communication is key. Sadly, the field of health has failed to do it well in many instances. Today, more than ever, I fervently ask our leaders to first show TRANSPARENCY. Make things clear for us. Make us understand how things will be managed, coordinated, and disseminated. Make us feel that you are on top of this and that processes are as clear as they can be.
Second, I ask for CONSISTENCY. We are tired of hearing conflicting statements, especially those from the higher ranks. Such conflicting statements create confusion which in turn causes panic. Let there be a single message from a single source.
Finally, I ask for INTEGRITY. Let us not fool each other. Again, kabaro mo na. Sana hindi ka na isahan pa. Tayo-tayo dapat ang nagtutulungan. Hindi dapat nag-gugulangan. Let us be honest to each other so we can all work well together. After all, we all aim for one goal – the end of this crisis.
The coming weeks will show how resilient and responsive our health care system is. The circumstances will test how our current systems will adapt and change according to the pressing needs of the people. Our experiences during this pandemic will surely change how we will implement the UHC law in a bigger scale in the following years.
Please pray for everyone, especially those in the frontline. It is a scary, scary world and we have nobody to save us but ourselves. Ingat!
DISCLAIMER: There is no way this post pertains to a particular individual, hospital, or organization. Before you try to twist whatever I said in this post and send complaints, please clarify them first with me. Send me a message. It’s free.
The proposed measure to allow foreign ownership of transportation and telecommunication services clearly sets a precedent for other public services in the Philippines, such as health care.
Opening the Philippine health care market to foreign ownership, obviously, has potential benefits including employment opportunities, better provision of health services, and health technology exchange. Foreign ownership of health facilities/service providers, however, has the potential to negatively affect the already struggling health care system of the country.
First, foreign investors may be enticed by the government to own hospitals and other health facilities (laboratories, ambulatory clinics, etc) in places where the government has failed or is yet to invest in. In this way, the government is lifting itself from the burden of expanding its public health services by allowing foreign investors to build and own these facilities. While this could be a win-win situation, poor regulation might undermine the primary intention of such set-up which is to improve access to health care services. In places where there is only one (monopoly) or few firms (oligopoly) providing health services, there is a potential for these firms to collude in order to maximize profits.
Second, foreign ownership has the potential to further promote a two-tiered health care system, separating the upper class from the low and middle classes. Having a two-tiered system means enabling price discrimination as an effective price-setting strategy. With price discrimination, some consumers will end up paying higher prices.
Almost every day I see patients (or their relatives) looking for stretcher beds as there are no longer available beds in the emergency room. This scenario, I suppose, will persist even when hospital renovations are finished this year. While increasing the hospital’s bed capacity potentially decreases waiting time for patients, no amount of beds will ever suffice. The neverending influx of patients in the Philippine General Hospital is a result of the increasing demand for health care among poor Filipinos amidst rising health care costs. The same is true, or even worse, for other government hospitals.
PGH is a microcosm of the Philippine health care system. Our experiences in this hospital mirror big challenges that the country will continue to face while implementing the universal health care law. First, poor gatekeeping at the primary care levels will allow patients to seek care at higher level facilities even when lower level facilities are capable of handling their medical conditions. This, coupled with patients’ poor confidence of primary care health workers, encourage them to flock in tertiary level facilities which results in overcrowding.
Second, chronic lack of manpower and other resources delay necessary care. Patient waiting time is high for common radiologic procedures (e.g. x-ray, ultrasound) because there are only few machines available for hundreds of patients. Nurses, faced with high patient workload, leave out essential care elements to meet only the urgent physiologic needs of their patients. Our study on nursing care rationing in PGH showed that 45% of nurses kept a patient who rung for a nurse waiting longer than five minutes. More than half of respondents disagree that there are enough nurses to get the job done or to provide quality care. More than half of nurses also reported a physician did not come or took a long time to arrive after a call.
These are few of the challenges that patients and health care workers in PGH continue to face. While we strive to be a model of health care delivery, our current set up is far from what we all have dreamed of – a hospital that transforms lives through excellent care, education and research. I cannot imagine how other hospitals and health workers deal with poorer work conditions.
The road to UHC is quite long. PGH is a reflection of the government’s failure to adequately lay concrete interventions that will make our journey smooth. Gatekeeping at the primary care level and provision of adequate human resources for health are two key elements that will drive the realization of universal health care.
It has been a great year. I cannot thank enough the people who have been part of this amazing 2019!
In the past, I wrote top lessons I learned during the year. For this year, I will have to put them aside and share with you nine questions I had in 2019 that remain unanswered (or partially answered). I hope to find answers in the coming new year.
- Can the healthcare system achieve both equity and efficiency at the same time? Or are the two concepts contradictory in healthcare? Should one be achieved before the other?
- How can we make the procurement process be more flexible and less corrupt while being strict on the quality of materials procured?
- What incentives could eventually reconcile self-interest and social interest?
- Should state-funded health care be rationed? How should the government ration health care to meet the current demand? How does rationing of care contribute to universal health care?
- Does the current national social health insurance program increase or decrease the efficiency of the use of scarce resources? Is ‘access’ rather than ‘utilization’ of health services a better measure of equity in health care?
- Do patients’ preferences affect the supply of health care services? Or are variations in the supply of health care services in various settings simply a response to high levels of patient demand? If not, how much do patients’ preferences contribute to utilization of health care services?
- How do we go about the Filipino culture of putting too much trust on one’s doctor to the extent that we lose exercising our right to participate in decision-making?
- Do we cast our nurses as “global goods” rather than “domestic providers” of health care, implicating them as sources of remittance income rather than for their potential contributions to the local health system? Is this kind of trade (trade in health services/providers) not only motivated by the desire for revenue, but also by the desire to cope with overproduction and lack of opportunities for nurses in the Philippines?
- Do people’s preferences and tastes change in situations where there are very few choices? Or do they develop an acquired taste/preference because of limitations posed by societal inequities?
We don’t usually depend on what others say about us or how they see us because we need to own our truth. But, up to which point do we continuously neglect the truth, as perceived by others? They, too, are mirrors to our truth.
The moment we deny ourselves the truth is the time we succumb to lie and deception.
It took ten years to reach this point; a manifestation of the slow, inefficient process of our Justice System.
Court’s decision today on ‘Ampatuan Massacre’, however, gives us hope that justice is not entirely elusive. Even those who cling to power cannot evade justice.
Justice will only be truly served when our journalists and other members of the press can continue to tell the truth without fearing for their lives. There is more that needs to be done.