HOSPITAL COSTS

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3801, 5 June 1928, Page 2

HOSPITAL COSTS

DOMINION FIGURES. MEDICAL CRITICISM ANSWERED. Wellington, June 2. A recent article in the New Zealand Medical Journal by Dr. J. S. Elliott criticised the growing costs of the hospital system of the Dominion, and the tendency to further multiply causes of expense. The retort comes from the journal issued by the Hospital Boards’ Association of New Zealand, which considers the reproaches unjustified, and proceeds to show that the medical critic has been misled by general statistics. “Although it is true, as Dr. Elliott indicates, that no less than forty new hospitals have been established in the ten years ending 1926, it is to he noted that fifteen are wholly maternity hospitals, four convalescent hospitals (one at each of the four metropolitan centres) and one a tuberculosis hospital. Of the remaining twenty hospitals, fifteen are described in the Director-General’s report as ‘maternity and emergency hospitals.’ Except two, none exceeded seven daily occupied beds during 1926-27, when the aggregate maintenance cost of these twenty hospitals was approximately £35,000, patients’ fees collected totalling £10,371.

“Jn only three instances —all in the one district —could it be suggested that the establishment of a new hospital has been the immediate outcome of a separation of hospital districts'.” EXPENSE NOT A MILLION. The reply to (he criticism admit? that the number of persons seeking treatment in our public hospitals lias increased tremendously, and with it the maintenance cost. It is pointed out that the expenditure for the year ended March 31st 1020, was not, as Dr. Elliott states, a million and a half. “It did not reach • the million mark.” The Journal adds: “While it is frequently claimed that the public hospitals of New Zealand are open by law to anyone, rich or poor, no! only has the law not been tested on the point, but there are compare lively few tff the public hospitals where, indirectly at any rate, a restriction is not imposed on the admission of those able to pay for treatment in private hospitals. In 1927 the number of beds provided in private hospitals for general and maternity eases was 2088, against 50-17 provided by hospital boards.’ MEDICAL STAPES. The article explains that the large proportion of hospital medical stall’s classed as stipendiary in the ease of the four largest hospitals is made up of radiologists, baete rioiogists, and other specialists and junior residents, while in the case of other hospitals it is made up of medical prartitioners in receipt ot small honoraria. Thus the published returns are apt to mislead. The average number of occupied beds in all general hospitals pei member of the medical staff (paid and honorary) is ll.fi, against an average of 8.3 for the four motiopolitan hospitals. “It is not, however, of course, attempted to dispute Dr. Elliott’s finding that as a training ground for surgeons, outside of a few ot I he larger hospitals, the public hospitals do not offer reasonable facilities for honorary surgeons, nor his conclusion that ‘surgical standards will not be greatly raised until hospital and private hospital practice are corelated.’ T urthermove, concludes this reply to the medical critic, “if public hospitals are to become community hospitals, and private hospitals are to he greatlv superseded, policy as , egards medical staffing is possibly the most important problem which hospital hoards have to face.”