Britain and Canada establishes the universal health care system that should be a part of communist society, which is most humane and most reasonable. But now, are both falling into plight, the long waiting time for treatment has become thorny issue, even both have the reports that there patients died since was unable to get treatment timely.
Facing such a situation, what we should censure for? Is it the insufficient of the government investment? Is it the lack of medical manpower? Is it the incompetence of governance? Or, others else?
The reports of years ago from Britain may give us some clue for answering.
Dec. 14 2009 00:47 GMT, the webste www.dailymail.co.uk pulished <Britain, the sick man of Europe: Heart and cancer survival rates among worst in developed world>, the writer Daniel Martin introduces the survey about the British universal health care service:
"A survey published yesterday by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development sees Britain languishing with the Czech Republic and Poland in international league tables on health."
"The OECD - which represents developed Western countries, some former Soviet nations, Mexico, Japan and South Korea - compared healthcare standards among its 30 members and found that we lag even further behind the wealthiest nations, such as France, Sweden and Germany."
"The figures showed:"
"British cancer and heart attack victims are more likely to die than almost anywhere in the developed world; "
"Asthma and diabetes patients are more than three times as likely to end up in hospital as their neighbours in Germany;"
"Life expectancy in Britain - 79 years and six months for a man - is far worse than in France, where men expect to live until 81. The deficit is similar for women."
"Britain performed only marginally better than former Communist states whose governments spend only half as much on healthcare. "
"The survey also found that British heart attack patients were more likely to die in hospital than others in the Western world."
"In 2007, 6.3 per cent had died within 30 days of admission - compared to 4.9 per cent across the OECD, and 2.9 per cent in Denmark. Britain also performed poorly on keeping asthma and diabetes sufferers out of hospital - reflecting badly on the quality of GPs."
"In Britain, 75 out of 100,000 people ended up in hospital with asthma in 2007. In France the figure was 43 and in Germany, just 21."
"The report found that Britain spends more than the average OECD nation on healthcare: just short of $3,000 per head of population."
"This compares to $1,626 in the Czech Republic, where cancer survival rates are almost as good. However, the OECD acknowledged that healthcare had improved over the past decade."
"Last night Health Secretary Andy Burnham said the data showed 'the enormous progress' that had been made."
Above information shocked me very much. I wonder that how worse will be before the enormous progress.
Feb 25 2010 13:45 GMT, the website ww.dailymail.co.uk published <Up to 1200 needless deaths patients abused staff bullied to meet targets... yet a secret inquiry into failing hospital says no one's to blame>, it siad that:
"1. Patients were left unwashed in their own filth for up to a month as nurses ignored their requests to use the toilet or change their sheets; "
"2. Four members of one family. including a new-born baby girl. died within 18 months after of blunders at the hospital;"
"3. Medics discharged patients hastily out of fear they risked being sacked for delaying;"
"4. Wards were left filthy with blood, discarded needles and used dressings while bullying managers made whistleblowers too frightened to come forward."
From above description, we may learn that the work ethic of some British medical staff is irrational, even authentic incredible.
Their practice have gone far beyond the moral category, in essence, it is non-human behavior.
--------------
I am googling, more coming soon....
--------------
Nov. 15, 2016, Now, follow something new is coming up.
The reason for my constantly
concerning about Dr. Danielle Martin, it is because that I have been thinking
about how to improve Canada's social governance.
The effective social governance need
real smart person, a person who is with extensive knowledge, not being bound by
dogma, neither superstition in democracy, nor superstition in religion, but, pragmatically
dealing with practical issue, by concrete analysis of specific
circumstances, come to a feasible solution and practice accordingly.
As my view, the real smart person
stems from well developed brain, following was the links of my related
writings.
The quality of brain decides human quality and social governance
The Knowledgeable people are the best for social governance
Knowledge and experience determines human behavior
Recruit employees by the quality of brain, not the academic degree
Social governing is not in political model, but in the quality of politicians
Low quality people are more harmful than that of wild animal
Feb. 09, 2014, I once wrote article Management is the Art of Playing Human Nature to have indicated that: Human behaviours are determined by dual natures: The culture nature of those acquired qualities, and the animal nature of those inborn instincts. The Management is to finish purposeful tasks with the culture nature driven by meeting the animal nature with payment under the enforcement of regulations. Therefore, the Management is the Art of playing human natures. Do not simply use morality to cover up human animal nature. The success of any enterprise is the result of very good played human nature. The famous America management consultant Peter Drucker said that: “The purpose of an organization is to make ordinary people do extraordinary things.” Management is efficiency. Management is profit.
Nov. 30, 2013, in article The feasible steps for improving Canada's health care system radically, I indicate that: For years, in Canada, The health care issues cause concern increasingly, especially; the long wait for treatment has developed into new killer of life. The poor medical service is not mainly due to the lack of medical resources in underinvestment, but, the poor governance is in playing leading role. It is possible to increase efficiency of medical service in 30% - 50%, only by organizational restructure, accountability and work performance linked payment and bonus. The introduction of new technology and Traditional Chinese Medicine will be the powerful means to renew health care system of Canada. That moves medical service from passively treatment to prevention in advance will be totally reverse the global deadlock in medical service – the updating of new technologies and investments have never caught up the speed of the development of new kind of diseases and the increase of the new patients.
The way for improving governance of health care in Canada is clear, we need a powerful management to acomplish it.
As my understanding, Dr.
Danielle Martin is a best person that can help improving social governance of
Canada in a broader aspect. Such as
that:
The feasible steps for improving Canada's health care system radically
Authorize non-partisan Super leadership to assist social governance
How to save Canada's manufacturers from disappearing
How to rescue Bombardier from the road-dust of failed RIM
Canada Pension Plan must develop in kind base and as key body of sate owned economy
How to Quick invitation of global promising enterprises into Canada
Set economic zones to avoid the harm of speculative real estate
How to revive Canada's non-energy manufacturing?
Gov-funded R&D Center Boosts Taiwan as One of Four Little Dragons
Nov. 18, 2016, Some ideas for Dr.
Danielle Martin
This discussion is motivated by Dr. Danielle Martin’s will that
offers her advice on health policy to anyone who’s willing to listen and the
direction of her upcoming teaching course that family physician has chosen
a subject near and dear to her: preserving and improving Canada’s medicare
system.
For a better
healthcare of Canada, it must be planned and practiced by professional
experts and scholars rather than appealing and waiting for listening of those
democratic players, and also that preserving and improving is not
enough, but, instead, it must be radically
reformed by integrated hospital replacing family doctor system, so that
patients can reach a right doctor with timely treatment.
Currently, in
most of time, family doctors and specialists are acting as nurse to
send patients somewhere else, patients have to be wandering in different places to see some one that may not the right one that they urgently needed, the
valuable medical resources are wasted in such a incredible way.
However, medical service reform is a kind of social reform, it would involve
the redistribution of interests form social resources reorganizing, and thereby
would touch the interests of some people, thus, the strong resistance is
inevitable. On other hand, Canada, as self-appreciated
democratic polity, some no-sense arguments is inevitable, of course.
The best way is
to avoid or reduce the resistance, rather than overcome it, which may cause endless political arguments that may lead to be paralyzed
in the practice.
In this regard, the success of China’s economic reform has set a
model, which was set an economic zone in a limited area with Gov-authorized
right of independent policy making under the name of testing, and then, by the
fruits to convince public to reduce social resistance. So, China’s economic
reform was from point to line and then from the line to area, in step by step,
gradually without social shake even blooding as that of some former socialist
countries that changed social system in a short period without preparation.
For the reform
of Canada’s healthcare system, firstly, it is to set a department in a hospital
as a test zone with the power of independent policy making, such as, an Emergency
Department, to make enjoyable fruits under name of trial and then by the fruits
convincing public, to enlarge the successful practice, thus, step by step,
gradually to reach desired goal.
Nov. 30, 2013,
in article The
feasible steps for improving Canada's health care system radically, I once
indicate that:
“The poor
work ethic of medical staff caused poor service
in British health care inspires Canada that plight of health care is not fully
due to underinvestment, but also the improper management, which
provides big potential for improvement.”
“Feb. 09,
2014, in article Management is the Art of Playing Human Nature, I indicate
that: human behaviors are determined by dual natures: The animal nature of
those inborn selfish instincts and the cultural nature of those acquired
altruistic qualities, the Management is the Art of playing human natures,
which is to finish purposeful tasks with human culture nature by meeting human
greedy of animal nature with payment under the enforcement of regulations.
Therefore, work-performance linked payment, accountability and regulations are
all indispensable.”
“It is possible to increase efficiency of medical service
in 30% - 50%, only by organizational restructure, accountability and work
performance linked payment and bonus.”
“We can establish
integrated Hospitals with labs, operating rooms and multi-divisions to
gradually replace current system, so that patients can get right treatment at
first time to avoid time wasted in wandering between family doctors and
specialists who work as nurse to send patients somewhere else in most of time.”
“That moves medical service from passively treatment to
prevention in advance will be totally reverse the global deadlock in medical service – the updating of
new technologies and investments have never caught up the speed of the development of new kind of
diseases and the increase of the new patients.”
“By introducing patented cancer treatment that treats patient by
injecting drug into tumor in 10 minutes without need of hospitalization and
postoperative medication, we can relieve the tension in medical investment and manpower.”
“By introducing Chinese medicine, we can improve health care from
patients over-depending on government to self health-keeping and
diseases-treating with self affordable and sustainable.”
“Above two measures can help to greatly improve the poor situation
in Canada’s health care, especially, get enough room for improving health care
system radically.”
“With increasingly demand of natural medicine, we can create an
approach for Canada Pension Plan in funds making and hedging by botanical
planting and processing. Thus, we can optimize the hedging way of CPP from
gambling luck in stock and bond market to invest into developing real economy
with well risk control and profit gain.”
“Thus, we can easily solve the plight of budget deficit and make
the improvement of Canada’s social governance in all aspects well coordinated
and mutually supported.”
Dr. Danielle MartinLast week, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) named Dr. Danielle Martin, executive vice president and chief medical executive at Women’s College Hospital (WCH), the recipient of the 2019 F.N.G. Starr Award, the highest honour available to association members.
Established in 1936, the award is often called the “Victoria Cross of Canadian Medicine”. It recognizes the outstanding and inspiring lifetime achievements of Canadian physicians. Previous recipients of the award include Sir Frederick Banting and Dr. David Naylor, among others. Dr. Martin is the third woman ever to receive this award and the youngest person to date.
Recognized for her efforts to improve Canadian health systems, Dr. Martin is a leading advocate for universal healthcare in Canada and beyond. She is a founder of Canadian Doctors for Medicare and frequently speaks to a variety of audiences on the importance of universal healthcare access and on evidence-informed system improvement.
Dr. Martin regularly shares her clinical and policy expertise with governments both nationally and abroad. Last year, along with Dr. PG Forrest, she conducted a review of all federally funded pan-Canadian health agencies for the federal Minister of Health. That same year, she also supported American Democrats’ Medicare for All Bill – an act brought forward by 14 high-profile senators that would create a single-payer healthcare system in America. In 2014, Danielle gained global recognition when she presented to a U.S. Senate Committee on the importance of universal medical coverage.
A health systems scholar, Dr. Martin was the lead author of ‘Canada’s Universal Health-Care System: Achieving its Potential’, one of two core papers for The Lancet’s special issue on Canada last year. Believing that all Canadians have a stake in the advancement of our health system, her 2017 national bestselling book ‘Better Now: 6 Big Ideas to Improve the Health of all Canadians’ provides clear and actionable steps to address pervasive health systems issues that deepened and informed health system conversations among citizens across the country.
Applying her expertise here at WCH, Dr. Martin is working across the hospital to implement new approaches to patient care. Through these efforts, WCH will set a new standard in healthcare.
Dr. Martin
Following is reproduced articles regarding
Dr.
Danielle Martin:
Dr. Danielle Martin to lead clinical and academic excellence at WCH in new executive role
2019-05-07 10:34:22 AM
Women's College Hospital Foundation extends its heartfelt congratulations to Dr. Danielle Martin, who has been promoted to the new role of Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Executive at Women's College Hospital.
Danielle was also recently awarded the prestigious F.N.G. Starr Award from the Canadian Medical Association, the highest award available to a CMA member that recognizes outstanding and inspiring lifetime achievement. Congratulations, Danielle!
.jpg.aspx "Dr-Danielle-Martin_2016-(email).jpg")
Danielle has been a member of the Women’s College Hospital executive team for the past six years and has practiced as a family physician at the WCH Family Practice Health Centre for 13 years. She is also the co-founder of the Women’s College Hospital Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, the hospital’s hub of health system thought leadership, innovation and research. In addition to her administrative and clinical duties at WCH, Danielle is an Associate Professor in the Department of Family and Community Medicine and the Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation at the University of Toronto. In her new role as the senior medical leader of Women’s College Hospital, Danielle will build, lead and support the hospital’s team of chiefs and medical leaders to deliver exceptional performance in clinical and scholarly work.
Danielle’s policy, clinical and academic expertise, combined with her commitment to health equity, have made her a highly regarded health system leader well beyond our organization. In addition to being the founder of Canadian Doctors for Medicare, Danielle is a much sought-after expert on health system improvement. She is frequently called upon to provide advice to governments and is also a well-recognized media spokesperson on issues related to health policy and patient care. People to watch: Danielle Martin
Dr. Danielle Martin has established herself as a leader in the debate over the future of Canada’s health-care system.
“My parents have both been small-p politically active. It’s from them that I get my values, my sense of equity and the desire to make a contribution in the world,” Martin said. Nick Kozak / For the Toronto Star
By: Theresa Boyle Health Reporter, Published on Sun Dec 30 2012
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2012/12/30/people_to_watch_danielle_martin.html
It’s Dr. Danielle Martin’s turn to lead the weekly grand rounds education session at Women’s College Hospital, and the family physician has chosen a subject near and dear to her: preserving and improving Canada’s medicare system.
Articulate and self-assured, she shares a PowerPoint presentation with 45 colleagues over a Thai food lunch.
“Is our health-care system unsustainable?” she asks rhetorically.
“I would say sustainability is in the eye of the beholder,” she answers, diving into an explanation of how a two-decade agenda of tax cuts has left the appearance that health-care spending is out of control.
At only 37, Martin has established herself as a leader in the debate over the future of Canada’s health-care system. She is chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare, was a member of the Health Council of Canada and is a recipient of the Canadian Medical Association Award for Young Leaders.
In April, her impact will grow when she takes on the position of vice-president, medical affairs and health system solutions at Women’s College Hospital.
“It’s a really exciting opportunity for me,” she says, “and I’m glad I can stay at Women’s College where I have built a community of practice and established relationships with my patients over nearly a decade.”
More: People to Watch
In a hostile health-care environment where big bucks are at stake, Martin goes out on a limb. Most recently, she has spoken out against private endoscopy clinics that are extra-billing patients, and about the failed bid by U.S.-controlled Centric Health to buy the Shouldice hernia hospital.
Martin comes by her progressive views naturally. Her father is labour movement activist and educator D’Arcy Martin.
Her mother, Anita Shilton, former dean of continuing education at Ryerson, emigrated with her parents from Egypt to Canada in the ’50s. After the family’s arrival, Shilton’s father developed a cardiac condition. Because medicare did not yet exist, the family was financially ruined.
“My parents have both been small-p politically active. It’s from them that I get my values, my sense of equity and the desire to make a contribution in the world.”
Martin honed her public speaking skills while on the debating team at McGill University, where she earned an undergrad degree in science.
From there, she landed at job at Queen’s Park, working as an assistant to Liberal health critic Gerard Kennedy.
While she has toyed with the idea of running for public office herself, she has chosen instead to try and effect change from a different vantage point. With a letter of recommendation from Kennedy, she enrolled in medical school at the University of Western Ontario.
“I was not sure that I would practise medicine when I went to medical school,” she says. “I thought I was going to learn and get an education and understand how the system works, so that I could better advocate for improvement, but then I fell in love with family medicine.”
After medical school, Martin worked for five years as a family doctor in underserviced areas in northern Ontario.
Today, she practises two days a week at Woman’s College and also works as a lecturer in the department of family and community medicine at the University of Toronto.
She lives in west-end Toronto with her partner, labour lawyer Steven Barrett, and their 3-year-old daughter, Isa.
In April, she hopes to have completed a master’s degree in public policy from the University of Toronto. Her new job at Women’s College starts immediately after she finishes the program.
Political parties woo Toronto doctor who delivered rousing defence of Canada’s medicare system in U.S. Senate
By Alexander Panetta, The Canadian Press | April 6, 2014 10:25 PM ET
Photo: Dr. Danielle Martin, vice president of Medical Affairs at Toronto’s Women’s College Hospital, spars with Sen. Richard Burr over the merits of Canadian healthcare.
Political offers have been pouring in for a doctor who enthusiastically defended the reputation of Canada’s medicare system during some tense exchanges in the U.S. Congress.
Dr. Danielle Martin said she’s been courted by political parties at the municipal, provincial and federal level since her appearance last month enjoyed a moment of viral celebrity.
But it’s clearly not something the Toronto physician, health-policy professor and vice-president of the Women’s College Hospital wants to discuss.
All Martin will say is that she has no interest in the offers, which came from different parties at all three levels of government to run in elections over the next year-and-a-half.
There have been some people who have reached out to me
“Certainly there have been some people who have reached out to me on that score,” she said in an interview.
“It helps that there seem to be elections pending at every level of major political office where I live. But I’m not doing that. I’ve got a big job already … I’m happy to offer my advice on health policy to anyone who’s willing to listen.”
Martin said she didn’t expect anyone other than her mom to watch her appearance last month before a U.S. Senate sub-committee.
The audience wound up being considerably larger. It included U.S. cable talk TV and American and Canadian news sites that ran clips from her snappy back-and-forth with Republican lawmakers.
Martin was invited to testify by the committee chairman, Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist who would like to see the U.S. adopt a single-payer system like in Canada, something Vermont is already doing.
Canada’s health system is really run by the provinces, with federal funding, Martin explained, citing research showing better outcomes for cancer and heart patients in Canada at a much lower cost than the U.S. medical system.
That made her a target for Republicans on the committee, but Martin counter-punched with gleeful spontaneity.
Was it true that Canadians were dying because of health rationing? Not as many, she replied, as the 45,000 Americans dying each year in a health-care system rationed on the basis of someone’s ability to pay.
What about those notoriously brutal waiting lists? Another panel member, Canadian-American medicare critic Sally Stipes, had described how her mom died soon after a colonoscopy in Vancouver for which she waited for months.
Waiting lists are a problem, particularly for elective procedures, said Martin, but not one that’s unique to Canada’s single-payer system. For Americans without insurance, she said in a later interview, the waiting list could be forever.
“You know, I waited in line for more than 30 minutes to get into this building today,” she told Republican Sen. Richard Burr.
“And when I arrived in the lobby, I noticed across the hall that there was a second entry point with no lineup whatsoever. Sometimes it’s not actually about the amount of resources that you have, but how you organize [them].”
At one point, the committee chair engaged in some play-acting. Canadians, he said, are well-informed about American politics — perhaps more so than Americans themselves. So are Canadians clamouring for U.S.-style health care?
No, Martin replied, to feigned shock from Sanders. “Is your prime minister a socialist?” he asked jokingly.
“No, sir,” Martin replied, “our prime minister is quite conservative.”
In Canada, she said, support for public health care cuts across party lines. Without specifically naming Stockwell Day or the 2000 federal election, she described how the leader of Canada’s “most-right-wing party” once held up a sign during a TV debate saying, “No Two-Tier Health Care.”
With the expiration of Canada’s 10-year federal-provincial health accord, Martin said she hopes policy-makers take stock of what works and what could be improved, such as getting all provinces to include pharmaceuticals in medicare coverage.
Offering that kind of advice is about the extent of her public aspirations, she said, despite her successful turn on such a big political stage.
“Part of it is the Internet age, and how clips of these things can travel long distances quickly,” she said of the reaction.
“But I also think that part of it is the whole conversation sort of struck a chord with Canadians… Nobody likes to see their system be unfairly criticized or mischaracterized.”
Canadian Medicare on Trial
Could this be the beginning of the end for the Canadian single-payer system?
BY DANIELLE MARTIN FROM OCTOBER 3, 2016, 1:55 PM – 5 MIN
http://democracyjournal.org/arguments/canadian-medicare-on-trial/
Photo by Vancouver Coastal Health via CC 2.0
There’s an old joke that Canadians like to tell: What’s a Canadian? A gunless American with health care.
It’s only funny because we half-believe it’s true; despite the many things we have in common with our friends south of the 49th parallel, Canada’s single-tier, publicly funded health care system has long been a point of differentiation—and pride—for most Canadians. A 2012 poll found that our health care system—known in Canada as “Medicare”—was almost universally loved, with 94% of those surveyed calling it an important source of collective pride. The notion that access to health care should be based only on need is a deeply ingrained Canadian value.
But we can’t take our Medicare system for granted.
The challenges to Canadian Medicare have always been ideological and political. But, as of this month, they are also legal.
In the western province of British Columbia, a trial underway in that province’s Supreme Court is challenging the very foundations of Medicare: providing care based solely on need, and not on ability to pay.
Cambie Surgeries Corporation and the Specialist Referral Clinic, represented by Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon in Vancouver, are suing the government of B.C., trying to knock down the laws that protect our single-payer system. If successful, some Canadians will be able to pay out-of-pocket or through private insurance for hospital and physician services—and doctors will be able to charge them whatever the market will bear.
In British Columbia, as in all Canadian provinces, “Medicare” provides public funding for all medically necessary hospital and physician services to all legal residents. Core to the system are some key restrictions on physician behavior.
Let’s say you come to see me in my office about a rash, or a possible pneumonia, or diabetes. I would talk to you, examine you, perhaps propose some laboratory tests, perhaps write you a prescription. The public insurance plan in my province would pay me for that 15-minute visit, let’s say $50. As a Canadian physician choosing to be enrolled in Medicare, I bill the government that $50, but I am not permitted to then bill you an additional $20—meaning copayments, or “extra billing,” is not allowed. In other words, Canadian doctors who bill the public insurance plan may not bill patients at all.
These restrictions on dual practice and extra-billing, coupled with B.C.’s ban on any private insurance that duplicates Medicare coverage, are the targets of the court challenge currently being brought forth by Dr. Day’s private for-profit, investor-owned surgical clinic.
The essence of the claim is that, because wait times for some elective surgeries in that province are longer than we would like them to be, doctors should have a constitutionally protected right to provide them more quickly and at a higher price. This would be done by charging some patients privately, either out-of-pocket or through private insurance. They allege that existing limits on charging patients privately infringe on patients’ rights to life, liberty, and security of the person under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This legal challenge emerged in response to an audit of Cambie Surgeries Corporation, which was carried out after patients complained to the B.C. government that they were being charged out-of-pocket for care. From a sample of Cambie’s billings, the auditors found that patients had been charged hundreds of thousands of dollars for health services already covered by Medicare. Championed by Dr. Day, Cambie Surgeries Corporation and the Specialist Referral Clinic then countered that the law preventing a doctor from charging patients more than the agreed upon fee schedule is unconstitutional—and a challenge to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms was born.
The opening statements, which began on September 6, 2016, are behind us now, but Canadians are following the case—expected to last at least 24 weeks—in the popular press, as Cambie’s lawyers try to paint a pretty dark picture of our health-care system. This, in spite of the fact that our outcomes are comparable to those in the United States and are achieved at a fraction of the price.
Meanwhile, the Attorneys General of B.C. and of the Government of Canada are countering that a multi-payer health care system would lure physicians from the public-pay sector to the private-pay sector, potentially reducing the availability, quality, and timeliness of care in the publicly funded system. Both governments will also argue that such a multi-payer health care system will drive up costs, forcing the public single payer to pay higher fees in order to “compete” with private insurers.
It is also worth noting recent efforts at tackling the main driver of this constitutional challenge: wait times for non-urgent surgery. These have come from within the public system, and include wait time targets, centralized intake for people with a common problem, and inter-professional health-care teams so that surgeons’ time does not create a bottleneck. Such initiatives show tremendous promise for reducing waits deemed unreasonable, but governments need to implement them, and health-care organizations and doctors need to help accelerate this kind of reform.
Whatever the decision of the trial judge in B.C., it is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The foundational pillar of Canadian Medicare—equitable access to health care for all—could well be threatened from coast to coast to coast by the outcome of this decision.
It may be that the Cambie plaintiffs will be unsuccessful in their quest to dismantle the essence of Medicare, but clearly the stakes for ordinary Canadians are very high. Like all developed countries, Canada struggles to control growth in health-care costs, meet the needs of an aging population, and provide timely care of the highest standard. Whether we continue to work to do so for all Canadians, or only some, will, in part, be determined by the outcome of the Cambie case.
Canada 'incredibly average' on reducing premature mortality compared with peer countries: report
For lung cancer in particular, Canadian women have lost ground compared with women in peer countries
CBC News Posted: Sep 29, 2016 10:10 AM ET Last Updated: Sep 29, 2016 11:13 AM ET
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/cihi-pyll-1.3783745
In 2010, Canadian women lost more years of potential life from lung cancer than women in most of the other countries, according to a new CIHI report. (Shutterstock)
Canada has reduced premature mortality rates tremendously over the past 50 years, but the country is still in the middle of the pack compared with "peer" countries such as Australia, Germany and Japan, according to a new report.
The Canadian Institute for Health Information compared health system performance in Canada to 17 other high-income countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 1960 to 2010.
The report's authors compared potential years of life lost (PYLL) — a measure of premature mortality based on estimating the extra time a person would have lived had he or she not died prematurely before age 70. For instance, someone who dies at 50 would have lost 20 years of potential living.
"We've really improved a lot over 50 years, about 60 per cent we've reduced in years of life lost," said Deborah Cohen, a senior researcher at the institute's Canadian Population Health Initiative. "But when we look at ourselves relative to other countries in that 50-year span, Canada is incredibly average."
For potential years of life lost among men due to cancer, Canada was ahead of the pack, but that wasn't the case for Canadian women, the researchers found.
For lung cancer in particular, Canadian women have lost ground compared with women in peer countries over five decades. It means that in 2010, Canadian women lost more years of potential life from lung cancer than women in most of the other countries.
"We're actually seeing this incredible move backwards," Cohen said.
Overall, smoking rates among Canadian men spiked in the 1960s and 1970s, and fell in the '80s and '90s. Canadian women were about 20 years behind in taking up smoking and quitting.
In general, Canada's health-care system doesn't do a good job in closing gaps in outcomes between men and women, said Dr. Danielle Martin, a family physician at Women's College Hospital in Toronto who wasn't involved in the report.
Heart and stroke are the top killer of women, but they represent only about a third of research subjects in studies around heart health, Martin said.
"If you think about the notion of systematic underrepresentation of women in medical research, it probably isn't surprising that both on the prevention side and treatment side, we're probably not implementing solutions that will get at the particular health needs of women," said Martin, a CBC Health contributor.
"We know women are less likely to be referred to cardiac rehab services following a heart attack."
Martin said the first step is to acknowledge that a gender gap exists.
"There is a health gap for women in Canada and it extends from research and prevention from population health, to the way that we design our health-care services," Martin said, such as only offering services from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. without child care.
Martin believes that the ways to address the gap are "well within our grasp."
Cohen sees these kind of international comparisons as a conversation starter, to see where Canada's health-care system shines and how it can be improved.
Politicians also have a role to play in shaping policy. On lung cancer prevention, for example, Cohen points to Australia as a role model for introducing plain cigarette packaging.
On the plus side, Canadian men and women fared well on stroke in the report.
But for potential years of life lost due to traffic collisions, falls, accidental poisonings and intentional self-harm, Canada was average for both sexes and lost ground in the last decade of the analysis.
With files from CBC's Kas Roussy
The right medicine
Ambitious initiative aims to focus care by connecting disciplines, saving money, ‘acting local, thinking global’
Through WIHV (WCH Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care), a brand-new way to deliver healthcare is being spearheaded by Dr. Danielle Martin, vice-president of medical affairs and health system solutions, and Dr. Sacha Bhatia, a cardiologist and Harvard research fellow.
By: Special to The Star Published on Thu Jun 13 2013
http://www.thestar.com/sponsored_sections/womenscollegehospital/2013/06/13/the-right-medicine.html
How do you run a hospital that’s designed to keep people out of hospital? That is the challenge that Women’s College Hospital has undertaken; and the answer is WIHV.
WIHV (pronounced weave ) is the acronym for WCH Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care. Dr. Danielle Martin, vice-president of medical affairs and health system solutions, states the goal of WIHV very simply: “What we’re really interested in is improving the healthcare system as a whole.”
To do this, WIHV will create innovative health system solutions to help keep complicated medical patients out of hospital, provide evidence to show the innovations work, and then share these models of care with others across the country.
The ambitious undertaking is being approached one step at a time. As the first step, WCH has recruited cardiologist and Harvard research fellow Dr. Sacha Bhatia to be the director of WIHV, luring him home to Toronto from the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. Dr. Bhatia starts his new job on July 1, but he’s already busy developing a strategic plan for the organization of the new institute.
“This is an innovation laboratory,” he explains. “It’s a great opportunity to develop and test new ways of delivering healthcare at a higher quality, more efficiently, and also to evaluate how successful these innovations have been. It’s a combination of doing work on the ground, and then evaluating the results to figure out how they can be scaled across the province; and what are the barriers to doing this.”
As WIHV works in collaboration with other healthcare organizations, its goal will be to develop and test systems designed to streamline healthcare delivery. Dr. Martin points out that many millions of dollars are misspent on preventable emergency department visits across the province; avoidable hospital admissions; and unnecessary or redundant diagnostic tests and scans. And it’s bad for patients, too.
“We’re all awakening to the idea that more isn’t necessarily better, and sometimes more can be decidedly worse,” she explains. “Unnecessary investigations and treatments can cause real harm to people. That harm on the individual level obviously leads to harm on the system level: every dollar spent on intervention that doesn’t help an individual is a dollar that can’t be spent on something that could. We want to find solutions that can be adapted across the system, so that we get maximum bang for the buck and the best patient care.”
However, she adds, this is not just about saving money. “We need to ensure that the right care goes to the people who will benefit, that the dollars are going where they’re needed. Our goal is about acting local but thinking global. Our patients are first and foremost, but we want to improve care across the board.”
To achieve these goals, WIHV envisions a wide range of possibilities, both organizational and technology-based. “We’re going to study how we integrate technology into the workflow to benefit patients and doctors,” Dr. Bhatia points out.
WIHV will also be working on new, fast ways to achieve speedy care for patients with chronic illnesses. Delays in seeing a specialist may result in a visit to emergency, or even hospitalization. “Are there fast ways to triage patients, to get them rapid access to specialty care?” muses Dr. Bhatia. WIHV is already involved with the SCOPE project, which facilitates rapid consultations between family doctors in the community and specialists in the relevant field, thereby curtailing potentially lengthy wait times for a specialist appointment.
Dr. Bhatia points out that the current health- care system is hampered by its “silo” approach: the different facets of care don’t always connect seamlessly with each other. “What is needed is a re-engineering of the way we deliver care and transfer data,” he says.
Another area of focus will be ensuring equity for marginalized segments of the population — refugees, new immigrants, the poor. “Equity is so critical,” notes Dr. Bhatia. “Patients in these groups often use a lot more of our healthcare resources, but also, their outcomes are much worse. If you address the systems issues relating to these groups, you’d improve the outlook, not just for them but also [in terms of] the costs to the system. A very small percentage of the population actually accounts for a lot of healthcare.”
Key to the success of WIHV will be its collaboration with other institutions. “Women’s College has a tradition of partnering with other hospitals,” Dr. Bhatia points out. “Our goal is to work with as many groups as we can, where it makes sense, to improve care within the sys tem.” This includes not only other hospitals, but also social services, home care agencies, CCACs (Community Care Access Centres), and post-secondary training institutions. “We aim to be the ‘glue’ that holds the rest of the system together,” Dr. Martin adds.
Both doctors see WCH’s unique status as an ambulatory hospital — with no overnight beds — as a rich opportunity to “build something special.” With money and energy directed to new models of care, WIHV will focus on more medium- to long-term care, Dr. Bhatia points out. “We can explore how to be innovative; how to push the envelope as to what healthcare can look like not just six months from now, but a year, five years, ten years. That’s really exciting.”
“Women’s College has always been an organization of innovation firsts,” concludes Dr. Martin. “It’s never been big, but it’s always at the forefront.” With the creation of WIHV, this tradition will continue.
Following are some articles of Dr. Danielle Martin
http://www.canadianliving.com/health/prevention/dr_danielle_martin.php
The future of Canadian health care
Dr. Danielle Martin answers our most pressing questions about the Canadian health care system, including what surprising treatment she prescribes.
By Kate Daley
Canadian Living: What are the most common medical issues you're seeing in patients?
Dr. Danielle Martin: There are two major trends. One is the re-emergence of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Across Canada, we're seeing more cases of whooping cough and mumps, both of which can be prevented with vaccines.
There are a few reasons for this emerging trend. First, some families are choosing not to immunize their children, which is a public health concern. Second, we are learning that some of these illnesses require booster shots. Those of us who were immunized 30, 40 or 50 years ago may actually need a top-up. Once in their lifetimes, for example, adults should have a booster against the whooping cough virus and some may require a booster of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. This is particularly important to women of reproductive age prior to having children. If you are wondering whether you need a booster, ask your primary care provider.
The second trend is the rise in chronic illness. According to Statistics Canada, nearly three-quarters of Canadians over 65 have at least one chronic condition, such as high blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis or depression, and nearly 25 percent have three or more chronic illnesses. We've done such a good job of treating the things that used to kill people, like infectious ?illnesses and acute illnesses, that Canadians are living for a long time with chronic illnesses.
Furthermore, as we all know, many of us are living lifestyles that predispose us to chronic illnesses. Ahealth-care system centred around hospitals is not as well-positioned to respond to that ?reality as the health-care system we are trying to move towards, which is one that is much more centred around primary care, community-based care and ?ambulatory care.
CL: What surprising treatment have you been prescribing?
DM: We used to think that you needed to exercise for 45 minutes at a time, four to five times per week to get the maximum cardiac benefits, but evidence has emerged about interval-based exercise approaches. There's also emerging evidence about the role of exercise in the treatment of a whole lot of diseases. We know that, in some cases, exercise can perform as well as or better than medicine for a whole range of health problems, like depression, diabetes, heart disease, arthritis and fibromyalgia. And there is evidence that if a doctor prescribes exercise to a patient, the patient is more likely to follow up on the recommendation. So I am ?prescribing exercise!
CL: What are you most excited about in the medical world?
DM: The emergence of personalized medicine and genomic research is very interesting. How soon will it be before people start routinely getting their entire genome sequenced, so they know what they are at risk developing over the course of their lifetimes? It's a bit of a Pandora's box. How does it change your insurability? How does it change the lifestyle choices that you make? What kind of information do we want access to?
This has been topical because of Angelina Jolie, who got her genes tested and found out she had a lifetime risk of developing breast cancer, which prompted her to get a prophylactic double mastectomy. That gene, called BRCAII, was discovered by a team of international researchers, including Dr. Steven Narod right here at Women's College Hospital in Toronto. In the case of that gene, we know the risk is very substantial and we have a preventative treatment to offer women, which is highly invasive but does work. Unfortunately, we can't say the same for being at high risk for major depression. Genomics and personalized medicine have the potential to pave the way for new treatments that could advance medicine in very significant ways.
Do you really need that pill?
From medications to supplements, Dr. Danielle Martin reveals whether you really need to take that pill
By Danielle Martin, MD http://www.canadianliving.com/health/prevention/do_you_really_need_that_pill.php
Every weekday afternoon, viewers across Canada tune in to Dr. Oz for tips on how to stay healthy. He can often be seen promoting new supplements and vitamins that he insists will promote strong bones, ward off cancer or impart any number of other benefits. There is good medical evidence to support the use of some of these supplements. Vitamin D, for example, is in short supply in our northern climate, because our bodies make it with exposure to sunlight; most Canadians should take a vitamin D supplement, especially in the winter months.
Other supplements are of questionable value, but harmless – such as vitamin C, which our bodies simply dispose of through urine. But others can cause harm, either by overloading the body with substances it can't eliminate (too much vitamin A can be toxic, for example) or by interacting with medications we take or even the foods we eat.
The truth is, we can get just about all the nutrients we need the old-fashioned way: by eating a balanced diet with lots of vegetables and adequate fruit. (Most vitamin supplements cost a lot more than a trip to the produce section!) So why do we keep gravitating to the latest supplement trends? It's because we've been taught that the answer to any problem is as simple as finding the right tablet, capsule or dissolvable powder.
The problem extends well beyond vitamins and herbal supplements into prescription pills. From antidepressants to medication for high blood pressure, Canadians have never taken as many pills as we do today. In some cases these medications truly save lives; in others they're of questionable benefit or actually cause harm.
The increase in prescription drug use also has implications for our personal finances and for the collective piggy bank: Canadians spent a whopping $31.1 billion on prescription drugs in 2010. That's $910 for every man, woman and child in the country, including what is spent publicly through tax dollars, what private insurance pays and what each of us spends out of pocket. That's triple the amount spent per person 20 years ago; our annual growth in prescription drug costs is higher than in any other wealthy country, even the U.S.
In part, this cost increase is because we simply consume more drugs than before: In 2009, Canadian physicians wrote 80 percent more prescriptions than they did a decade earlier. But we also pay too much for our medications. We could drive harder bargains with pharmaceutical companies if we bought our medications in bulk, as many other countries do, or if our public and private plans covered expensive new medications only once they had been shown to improve on older, less expensive versions.
Though there is overuse of prescription medications and supplements in some segments of the population, there is underuse in others. Even with the amount of money the country spends on drugs, there are still many Canadians left behind. Recent studies have confirmed that one in 10 Canadians does not take medication as prescribed because of concerns about cost.
In most provinces, public drug plans take care of seniors and people on social assistance, and many people in steady jobs have coverage through employers. But up to eight million Canadians (or 23.5 percent), including many young people and people who are self-employed or work part time, have no prescription coverage at all. And when people can't afford necessary medicines, they end up in hospital, which drives costs even higher.
When medicare was first adopted, treatment by doctors and hospital stays were all that needed to be covered, because those were the main costs of health care. Today, many Canadians battle multiple chronic conditions and live longer lives, but our system hasn't adapted to this new reality. The notion that access to prescription meds should be based on need rather than ability to pay hasn't gained traction yet.
We don't have to accept this state of affairs: France, Australia and Sweden all have universal pharmaceutical coverage, and they pay far less for their drugs than we do.
Individual health rests not on this or that new pill or vitamin, but on living a healthy lifestyle. The same is true of our health-care system, which will achieve its full potential only when all the different parts are working together. A proper health-care system is one that provides coverage of necessary medications for the entire population – and at a price that doesn't break the bank.
Danielle Martin is a family physician in Toronto and the vice-president of Medical Affairs and Health System Solutions at Women's College Hospital.
If you want to know more about supplements, here's our guide on everything you need to know about vitamin D.
This content is vetted by medical experts
Debunking myths about aging
Dr. Danielle Martin, M.D. rethinks silly notions about getting older.
By Danielle Martin, MD
When you imagine your life in the decades to come, you probably hope you'll maintain your health and independence. The big myth about aging is that physical and mental decline are inevitable. Those myths seem to be perpetuated everywhere we look.
Certainly, at age 70 we are not what we were at 20. Mind you, we do reap the benefits of a lifetime of accumulated wisdom and experience. However, as the baby boomer generation reaches retirement, it's perhaps time all of us – doctors and other health-care providers included – rethink some of our assumptions about aging and the impact of aging on our health-care system. (There, too, we need to separate fact from fiction. The news is better than you think!)
Here are three myths about aging that need to be put to rest.
1. It is normal to have pain as you age.
All too often, people endure all manner of aches and pains, assuming these are a normal part of aging. In fact, such pain is often related to undiagnosed conditions that can actually be prevented or treated effectively. For example, one common cause of joint pain later in life is osteoarthritis, a condition that can be aided by particular kinds of exercise, a variety of supplements and medications, and even joint-replacement surgery. Don't allow yourself – or your aging parent – to accept that aging and pain go hand in hand.
2. It is normal to lose your memory with age.
While we all occasionally forget where we put our keys or cellphones, many people assume they will need to get used to much more serious memory loss as they age. This isn't the case. Most seniors don't develop severe memory loss. They will always be able to exercise good judgment and learn new skills. People who experience more severe memory problems could have a treatable medical condition. We can all help our memories stay sharp by keeping our brains and bodies active. Doing regular exercise and embracing cognitive challenges, such as learning another language or doing Sudoku puzzles, have both been shown to protect against dementia.
3. The aging of the baby boomer generation will put unsustainable strain on our health-care system.
This myth surfaces constantly in public debates about the future of health care in this country. In reality,health-care costs don't go through the roof just because there are more seniors. If usage rates remain constant, the increase in health-care costs caused by aging will happen gradually, at about one percent per year. Even minimal economic growth would easily cushion such a shift.
Why is this? In part, it's because the population shift is a slow one: People only age one year at a time. While seniors spend the most health-care dollars, the growth rate of their spending has actually been lower over the past 10 years than that of younger adults. In fact, health spending has increased because people are using services more often, regardless of age.
So concerns about the sustainability of public health care in the context of an aging population are misplaced – but that doesn't mean our system is perfect. Policy-makers and health-care providers are working hard to transform our health-care system into one that provides the care Canadians need and want, so they can lead full, productive lives in the best of health.
Danielle Martin is a family physician in Toronto and the vice-president of Medical Affairs and Health System Solutions at Women's College Hospital.
We have lots more advice on dealing with aging. Plus 10 ways you can slow down the aging process.
Find your mind-body connection
Dr. Danielle Martin explains how finding your mind-body connection can get you through holiday stress.
By Dr. Danielle Martin
December is a difficult month for many Canadians. People who may have negative associations with the holidays – due to lost loved ones, perhaps, or strained finances – can have a hard time seeming perky at the office Christmas party. Even those who love the cold weather and look forward to time off with family and friends can find things to stress about.
Stress isn't just an emotional state, it's a physical one. When we feel stressed or overwhelmed, our bodies produce hormonal responses that put our whole system into overdrive. This puts pressure on literally every part of the body, and can lead either to vague physical symptoms or outright illness. During the holidays, we also tend to eat badly and drink alcohol, which can make mental and physical problems worse.
As a family physician, I see the connection between mind and body daily. Many of us have what I call a "stress weak spot": a body symptom that tends to flare up when we're under emotional pressure. For some, the lower back goes out; for others, a headache flares up or a stomach cramp hits. I have long believed that these recurrent symptoms are the body's way of sending us messages: slow down, be kind to yourself, take extra care.
Depression, anxiety and other mental health disorders are common in Canada: one in five Canadians will experience a mental illness in their lifetimes, and the remaining four will have a friend, family member or colleague who will. Unfortunately, treatment remains fragmented and inaccessible to too many Canadians. Children, youth and seniors often have particular difficulty accessing mental health services. Many reports over the last decade point to the need for improved accessibility to services, including counselling of various kinds.
But improving mental health isn't just about improving access. Ideally, it's about preventing illness before it happens. The Mental Health Commission of Canada has confirmed that a sense of belonging, the ability to enjoy good relationships, safe housing and a stable income are all critical to one's well-being.
In the absence of strong social programs that identify and treat mental illness early, people living with mental illness often end up in facilities focused on physical illness – emergency departments, hospital wards, etc. – where mental health can worsen.
Physical symptoms can be a sign of stress, and this is as true for one person as it is for entire communities. Poor health among a whole population is sometimes the most noticeable symptom of a set of problems that go much deeper. Rather than addressing the social conditions that would build strong and healthy communities, we often stop short and focus only on the physical problems that are easiest to see.
Last year, Canada reached a major milestone: the release of the first ever national mental health strategy. It's an ambitious plan that calls for a comprehensive approach to mental health, including addressing social factors, gaps in research and the coordination of services.
The holidays are a good time to reflect on what matters most to us. As we prepare to ring in 2014, let's commit to taking better care of ourselves emotionally, and also to helping ease the burden of mental illness in our communities.
Danielle Martin is a family physician in Toronto and the vice-president of Medical Affairs and Health System Solutions at Women's College Hospital.
We have lots more health advice from Dr. Martin, including what pills you really need to be taking.
Do you really need that screening test?
4 ways to keep your family healthy over March break
Tips on how to improve your heart health
Thank you Danielle for reminding us what this country is worth
Ontario could spread Pharmacare to the rest of Canada — Dr. Danielle Martin
It wasn’t one of her three big ideas to improve health care, but it was a brief moment of brilliance.
During Monday’s RamsayTalks at the University of Toronto, Dr. Danielle Martin had just been asked by the Rotman School’s Mark Stabile how she would achieve her goal to expand public drug coverage when there was a declining appetite for deficits or taxes.
Her initial comment was “please, somebody tax me.” Given the creation of Doctors for Fair Taxation (their link is on the right) that part of the message is not entirely new nor is it a surprise that Martin would say it. It was the phrase that followed that was far more interesting: “I think our country is worth it.”
At that moment it sounded warmly nostalgic.
Conservatives like Stephen Harper and Tim Hudak want us to know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. “Worth” just doesn’t come into play.
Conservatives like to wrap themselves all around the flag and the military. They talk about the ultimate sacrifice young men and women pay with their lives to preserve our freedom. Yet when we ask them to simply pay taxes so that no Canadian is left behind in our economy, well the hypocrisy becomes self-evident. Young people are expected to give up their lives. Conservatives will only grudgingly part with their silver.
A few weeks ago we had lunch with Alex Himelfarb who suggested we need to start reclaiming some of this terminology. The highest ranking civil servant in Ottawa under three different Prime Ministers, Himelfarb said that it bothers him to hear neo-conservatives talk about freedom. When a government leaves so many of its citizens in poverty, without a job and without a future, what freedom of choice do these citizens really have? It is government itself that has the capacity to give them choice.
The wealthy will always have freedom and choice. In this election Tim Hudak is selling anything but freedom. We’re told there is no choice but to cut 100,000 jobs. There is no choice but to undermine our unions. There is no choice but to balance the budget in two years. How do these Conservatives equate “freedom” with their mantra of no choice? It is the opposite of freedom.
We’re told the middle class feels hard-done-by despite the significant taxes that have already been cut. Economist Hugh MacKenzie regularly reminds us that tax cuts have already removed $17 billion annually from the provincial treasury. That too means less choice in solving our many problems. If $17 billion has been given back, why is it so many feel they are not getting ahead?
Aside from stagnant real wages (except at the top), this may also come back to the question of value and worth. Mackenzie quantified the value of public services in a 2009 study appropriately called Canada’s Quiet Bargain. He concluded that the average per capita benefit from public services in 2006 amounted to $16,952. About 56 per cent of that benefit comes from health care, education and personal transfer payments. For households in the $80,000 to $90,000 income bracket, the benefit they receive from public services is equal to about half their income.
Later that same year Mackenzie argued that if Stephen Harper had transferred 2 per cent of the HST to the municipalities — rather than simply cut it — about 80 per cent of Canadians would have benefited. You might not be facing quite the number of pot holes this spring.
Government by its very nature is redistributive. If we look at rising inequality and all the social ills that come with it, it is because we are feeding that inequality through cuts to public services.
Monday night Dr. Martin showed us the possibilities of what we can accomplish with very little real investment.
Surprisingly despite the suggestion by Mark Stabile that Canadians are tapped out when it comes to taxes, our own polling shows otherwise when clear goals can be attached to that revenue.
Even Rob Ford was willing to tax Torontonians to pay for a Scarborough subway.
Polling also shows us Ontarians would pay more to get better access to quality health care.
Next time somebody calls for a tax cut, shouldn’t we question both their commitment to this country and what those taxes are worth to our families?
Is Ontario worth it? We think so.
Thank you Danielle. Thank you Alex.
Dr. Danielle Martin: The car might be the best place to talk to your kids
https://www.facebook.com/cbcnews/videos/10154609873314604/
Danielle Martin
MD (University of Western Ontario) CCFP
MPP (University of Toronto)
Professional Interests
healthcare policy, health system innovation, primary care
It is my strong belief that research and education in the areas of health care policy and health care systems are important means of ensuring that the health needs of communities are met, and also vehicles for achieving social change. Through novel curriculum design, implementation and dissemination, I have worked to increase understanding of healthcare system issues in the Canadian medical community in hopes of achieving that higher goal. I have worked as an advocate for the preservation and improvement of public health care in Canada for over a decade and with many different hats in the realm of health care policy. I am also an actively practicing family doctor and hospital administrator. Throughout my career I have maintained an active academic practice in which I participate in clinical and health policy education at all levels. I hope that by role modeling and teaching both clinical care and advocacy skills I will open the door for my colleagues at all stages of their careers to do the same.
Awards and Distinctions (last 10 years)
2014 Apr- 2014 CFPC – Scotiabank Family Medicine Lectureship Award, College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC)
This award recognizes an outstanding Canadian or international figure who has contributed significantly to issues related to the health and well-being of people in Canada and/or around the world.
2012 Dec-People to Watch, The Toronto Star.
The Toronto Star Distinguished Dr. Danielle Martin as one of the thirteen people to watch in Toronto in 2013.
2011- Award for Social Responsibility, University of Toronto.
Awarded annually by the Department of Family and Community Medicine.
2011- Dr. Harrison Waddington Fellowship in Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto.
For educational scholarship in the area of health policy and advocacy curriculum evaluation. Total Amount: 4,000 CAD
2011- Inaugural Recipient, Schulich School of Medicine Young Alumni Award, University of Toronto.
Awarded for the first time by the School of Medicine at the Unversity of Toronto in honour of the school’s 130th anniversary.
Other Affiliations:
- Assistant Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto
- Vice President, Medical Affairs and Health System Solutions, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto
- Academic Family Physician, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto
- Academic Family Physician, Family Practice Obstetrics, Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto
Publications
Follow articles show that Dr. Danielle Martin is a person in active thinking and Hardworking
