Financing Healthcare for Adults with Cancer in the UK - Essay Example

Financing Healthcare for Adults with Cancer in the UK Introduction The number of people diagnosed with cancer is ever increasing, making cancer the global leader in cause of disease. Similarly, reports show that cancer accounted for about 14 percent of worldwide deaths in 2008, leading to questions regarding the affordability of cancer care among patients (Kings College London, 2011). According to Corner & Bailey (2008, pp. 691), morality and ethics demand that people with cancer be accorded the right treatment. Internationally, research has concentrated on how much funding is channeled towards cancer treatment and care. Developing countries are using more money each year in proving cancer care (Nursing Times, 2011). The increase in the amount of money used is caused by, in addition to more cancer patients, more expensive individualized treatments, and inappropriate cancer products. Drugs for treating cancer are become ever more expensive, as is the technology used to diagnose and treat cancer. According to Kings College London (2011) high-income countries are having a hard time bearing the cost of cancer care, due to unsustainable funding mechanisms. Accordingly, many countries around the globe have come up with several strategies to finance healthcare for people with cancer. Accordingly, this essay aims to examine the various options for financing healthcare among adults living with cancer in the United Kingdom (UK), while analyzing the implications these financing options have for patients, managers, and practitioners. Cancer management in the UK Statistics, according to Cooksey (2006, pp.45), reveal that a quarter of all deaths within the UK are caused by cancer. Approximately 11,000 people aged between 15-40 years are affected by cancer each year, in the UK (ibid). This means that millions of people in the UK require treatment for cancer, which can be a very costly affair. Prescriptions cost a lot of money, as do special diets, and in some cases; travel costs to hospitals. Accordingly, cancer patients in the UK are presented with a range of options for financing healthcare. The National Health Service In the UK, cancer patients have the option of having their healthcare financed by the National Health Service (NHS), a government-funded healthcare program that draws its finances from tax revenue. According to Bosanquet & Sikora (2006, pp. 44), the NHS aims to provide healthcare for all people, based on need and not because of their ability to pay. For example, the NHS spent approximately 5.86 billion Euros on cancer care between 2009 and 2010 (Nursing Times, 2011). In addition, the Department Of Health has provided more than 450 million Euros for early diagnosis of symptomatic cancer across the UK (Wonderlich & Jones, 2007 pp. 30). This is good news for General Practitioners (GPs) who will be able to conduct diagnostic tests to confirm or rule out cancer, enabling them conduct quicker referrals. The extra funding is also good for the patient since early diagnosis will give them a better chance of seeking treatment and beating cancer. However, as Spiers (2008, pp.112) states, international survival rates for cancer in the UK are among some of the lowest in countries that spend as much as on health as the UK does. The NHS is unable to offer new cancer drugs to patients due to the high cost of the drugs. For example, the NHS has been unable to provide Avastin, Tarceva, Erbitux, and Herceptin to patients, citing the high cost of these drugs (Spiers, 2008 pp. 113). This means that patients under the NHS program lack access to quality drugs that capable of prolonging life. GPs are also forced to administer low quality drugs to patients, thus limiting their scope of practice. The NHS funding model also lacks clarity, fairness, and transparency. In essence, there is neither a defined national model for funding cancer treatment, nor a national tariff for the same in the UK (Arts, Meulen, & Muffles, 2001 pp.233). This translates to a lot of discrepancies in the manner in which healthcare is funded per patient, per region. Managers are left to decide which patients are eligible for receiving NHS funded treatment, and how much allocation such a patient should get. This is no easy task for the managers of NHS funds considering there are no laid down procedures and guidelines for assessing eligibility. Private funding In the UK, individuals with cancer can also privately finance healthcare services, although different healthcare facilities have different cancer treatment rates. For example, according to Cancer Research UK (2012b), a person can pay at least 50 Euros for a private consultation with a cancer specialist. When other costs such as treatments, chemotherapy, tests, radiotherapy, and surgery, among others are added, the cost could go thousands of pounds. This means that most people are unable to access private healthcare for cancer due to the high cost of treatment. For the managers and practitioners of private healthcare providers, business is very lucrative especially if the patient is able to afford such kind of treatment. For a patient who can afford to pay for private treatment, chances of getting better drugs and up-to-date diagnostic technology are very high, thus increased ability to live with cancer. However, for those patients who cannot afford private treatment, NHS remains as the best option among the few available options. Unfortunately, the UK system has traditionally disallowed a person who belongs to the NHS scheme to privately pay for their own medicine. For example, if the NHS lacks a particular kind of drug, a patient under the NHS funding system cannot privately pay for the drug. A case in point; according to Spiers (2008, pp. 114) is that of Mrs. Linda O’Boyle who was denied the opportunity to buy Erbitux with her personal savings. She was given the option of either sticking with the NHS bowel cancer treatment or go for private treatment, but not both. Consequently, Mrs. O’Boyle died at 64, whereas the drug could have prolonged her life for at least six more months (ibid). According to the House of Commons Health Committee (2009, pp. 67), allowing private funding for certain types of treatments will lead to a two-tier system, which will only favor those who have the ability to top-up their NHS treatment. Nonetheless, the Cancer Research UK (2012a) reports that the UK government has recently come up with a temporary scheme, the Cancer Drugs Fund, to allow cancer patients to purchase drugs that are not available on the NHS. Similarly, 650 million Euros have been allocated to expenditure on cancer treatments not available under the NHS. Charitable organizations Stevens & Rafterry (2007, pp. 186) state that the voluntary sector has for a long time been responsible for raising funds to cater for the health needs of cancer patients. In the UK, there are a number of charitable bodies that offer financial help to cancer patients and their families. Traditionally, these charities would raise funds from the local community to fund treatment and to establish palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. However, in the last few years, charitable organizations have partnered with the NHS, the latter which gives them grants to supplement the funds raised at the community level (ibid). Marie Curie Cancer Center, Sue Ryder Foundation, and the Cancer Relief Macmillan Fund are examples of the most popular charities providing funds to cancer patients. For example, Marie Curie gives funding to over ten palliative care inpatient centers, while their nurses offer services to cancer patients during the day and night (Payne, Seymour, & Ingleton, 2008 pp. 73). Cancer Relief Macmillan Fund finance also works towards ensuring access to healthcare service for cancer patients. The Macmillan Cancer Fund has, according to David (1995, pp.258)11 centers all over the UK, where they provide care to inpatients and outpatients. According to Tobias & Hochhauster (2012 pp. 198) some charities require that patients be referred to their organizations by professionals such as doctors, social workers, and nurses. This way, individual eligibility and neediness can be assessed. For example, Macmillan Cancer Support gives grants to people with cancer for various needs, but requires that professionals such as social workers, Macmillan nurses, or GPs make applications on behalf of patients (BBC, 2012). According to Courtney (2002, pp. 206) sometimes charitable organizations, especially one’s that are not well established, may have financial problems making them unable to provide financial aid to cancer patients. In response, the managers in these organizations may choose to “deprofessionalize” their staff and start using volunteers to provide care to patients. Accordingly, professional practitioners are left jobless, while patients are left in the hands of volunteers, the latter who lack professionalism. Local health authorities Local health authorities also fund healthcare services, especially home care services for people affected by cancer. Since the 1990s, local health authorities in the UK have been very active in developing strategies for availing care for all cancer patients on an equal basis. According to Roach& Sossin (2006, pp. 466) local health authorities have particularly been very keen in providing services to patients with advanced cancer, through the provision of palliative care. This means that people at the last stages of their lives are given proper care at the hands of the local authorities. However, reports show that different local authorities have differing volumes of services, from one region to another. As a result, the UK government has had to channel more money towards reducing the glaring inequalities. For example, the National Lottery has directed money towards the New Opportunities Fund to finance palliative care and narrow the differences per region (Asthana & Halliday, 2006 pp. 492). This means that managers at local health authorities are forced to come up with new strategies for assessing the eligibility of cancer patients to receive healthcare services. On their side, cancer patients stand to gain most from the increased funding because they will have more access to more and better services. In addition, local health authorities are able to afford the services of GPs and specialists, the latter who are better equipped to diagnose and recommend treatment for cancer patients. Free prescriptions and benefits The UK government has also made strides towards offering free prescriptions for cancer patients. People undergoing cancer treatment only need to fill a form FP92A, which they can get form their GP or oncologist, and then apply for an exemption certificate. According to the BBC (2012) for example, England started giving people with cancer free prescriptions since 1 April 2009. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have also adopted this system of offering free prescription for cancer patients. In some cases, low income earners affected by cancer may be able to get financing for such costs as travel to hospital, and purchase of wigs by filling a form HC1 (BBC, 2012). In addition, there are a number of benefits that people with cancer are entitled to. Simon (2008) gives the example of Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) for people who are unable to continue working due to the effects of cancer. Cancer patients between the ages of 16-65 years are entitled to payment for the first 28 weeks after claiming the benefit from their employer. Incapacity Benefit is the equivalent of SSP for self-employed patients. Conclusion Evidently, financing healthcare for people with cancer is no easy task. Different countries have come up with several strategies for financing cancer treatment, in a bid to ease the economic burden brought about by cancer. The UK uses such options as government funding through the NHS and local authorities, there is private financing, charitable organizations, and benefits. These options for financing cancer care lack the transparency and integration needed to give the best care for cancer patients. Of particular concern is the refusal by the NHS to allow people under their wing finance private treatment. This has often led to people dying or undergoing pain that could have been solved with private treatment. Nonetheless, it is important to acknowledge that the UK has made a good effort in diversifying the options for healthcare access to cancer patients. In general, affordable cancer care in the UK is possible, with the right methods and strategies for finance. References Arts, W., & Meulen, R., & Muffles, R. 2001. Solidarity in Health and Social Care in Europe. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Asthana, S., & Halliday, J. 2006. What Works In Tackling Health Inequalities?: Pathways, Policies And Practice Through The Lifecourse. Bristol: The Policy Press. BBC. 2012. Financial Help for People with Cancer. Available at www.bbc.co.uk. [Accessed December 31, 2012]. Bosanquet, N., & Sikora, K. 2006. The Economics of Cancer Care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cancer Research UK. 2012a. 18500 Patients to Receive Treatment through Cancer Drugs Fund. Available at www.cancerreserchuk.org. [Accessed December 30, 2012]. Cancer Research UK. 2012b. Getting Private Treatment. Available at www.cancerreserchuk.org. [Accessed December 30, 2012]. Cooksey, D. 2006. A Review of UK Health Research Funding. Norwich: The Stationery Office. Corner, J., & Bailey, C. 2008. Cancer Nursing: Care in Context. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Courtney, R. 2002. Strategic Management for Voluntary Nonprofit Organizations. London: Routledge. David, J. 1995. Cancer Care: Prevention, Treatment and Palliation. London: Nelson Thornes. House of Commons Health Committee. 2009. Top-Up Fees: Report, Together With Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence. Norwich: The Stationery Office. Kings College London. 2011. Cancer: A Global Challenge. Available at www.kcl.ac.uk. [Accessed December 31, 2012]. Nursing Times. 2011. Cost Of Cancer Treatment Questioned. Available at www.nursingtimes.net, [Accessed December 30, 2012]. Payne, S., Seymour, J., & Ingelton, C. 2008. Palliative Care Nursing: Principles and Evidence For Practice. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill International. Roach, K., & Sossin, L. 2005. Access to Care, Access to Justice: The Legal Debate over Private Health Insurance in Canada. London: University Of Toronto Press. Simon, C. 2008. Support for Cancer Patients. Available at http://rcgp-inovait.oxfordjournals.org. [Accessed December 31, 2012]. Spiers, J. 2008. Who Decides Who Decides?: Enabling Choice, Equity, And Access, Improved Performance And Patient Guaranteed Care. Oxon: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd. Stevens, A., & Rafter, J. 2007. Health Care Needs Assessment: The Epidemiologically Based Needs Assessment Reviews. Oxon: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd. Tobias, J., & Hochhauster, D. 2012.Cancer and Its Management. West Sussex: John Wiley &Sons. Wonderlich, S., & Jones, R. 2007. Key Topics in Healthcare Management: Understanding the Big Picture. Oxon: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd. Read More