Showing posts with label Comparing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comparing. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Medical tourism statistics: Comparing apples with apples ....

At Treatment Abroad, we’ve recently completed some research into the medical tourism market for a third party. It’s been an interesting exercise and has really made us question some of the statistics that are quoted (and that often become accepted truth) about the number of medical tourists and the value of the market.

What is a medical tourist?
The first challenge in estimating market size is to be very clear about what a medical tourist actually is. He or she isn’t a tourist. It’s someone whose specific reason for travelling to another country is for medical treatment. It’s not someone who happens to fall ill and requires treatment when they are on holiday/vacation.

Yet many tourism organisations, government bodies, hospitals and clinics classify ailing holidaymakers as medical tourists. They are not.

The data from one destination that we examined claimed vast numbers of medical tourists but in the “small print” acknowledged that the vast majority of these happened to fall ill while visiting the country for other reasons, either business travel or holiday travel.

Another inflationary factor is the expatriate resident. Back in the 1990’s I was involved in the marketing of the Portland Hospital for Women and Children in London. We used to track hospital admissions by nationality of patient. Based on that analysis, the hospital was the biggest medical tourism destination in the world for American medical tourists..... or was it? Of course not. As the only private maternity hospital in London, it attracted a large number of American women whose families were based in or working in London. Did a single American woman fly across the Atlantic specifically to give birth or for gynaecological treatment in London? No, but we could have made it look like plane loads were arriving every month!

Comparing apples with apples
Before the dawn of computing, I studied statistics at college. What I learned about statistics is that you have to compare like with like. You compare apples with apples. But in medical tourism people compare apples with grapes, and oranges with lemons...... Let me explain....

Let’s agree that a medical tourist is someone who travels specifically for treatment in another country, And let’s also agree that medical tourism is a specific segment of the health tourism market which does not include travel to medical spas or wellness resorts or for non-invasive therapy. For the sake of clarity, we’ll exclude dental travel from medical tourism in this instance.

So John Smith jumps on a boat or a plane or a train or into a car and crosses a border into another country and has...an operation or an elective procedure. (Should we include patients who don’t stay overnight? There’s another discussion...).

Are we agreed on what a medical tourist is? Good. John Smith is a medical tourist. He’s one medical tourist, isn’t he?

Well..... that depends where he goes.

In Country A (or in Hospital A), he counts as one medical tourist.

But in Country B (or Hospital B), he counts as 20 medical tourists.

20...am I mad? No.

This is how it works in Country B.

John Smith arrives in Country B. He visits the specialist, and the hospital raises an item of service bill for the visit. The hospital records him as one medical tourist treated.The specialist sends him for an X Ray. The hospital raises an item of service bill for the visit. The hospital records him as another medical tourist treated.The specialist sends him for some pre op blood tests. The hospital raises an item of service bill for the visit. The hospital records him as another medical tourist treated.He has the operation. Bingo! Another medical tourist.He collects some medication from the hospital pharmacy. Another medical tourist.He has post op physiotherapy for ten days.... ten medical tourists.And so it goes on.....

John Smith is one medical tourist but according to the hospital records he’s twenty or thirty or maybe even more. And this is good news for the marketing guys in the hospital and at the tourism board. They have some pretty impressive medical tourism statistics.

So, we can see that the medical tourism statistics quoted by some destinations are subject to “statistical error” but not the kind of statistical error I learnt about at college. In some cases this is error on a magnitude of ten fold or twenty fold or even more.

Take medical tourism statistics with a pinch (or sack) of salt
When you hear the latest claim of medical tourism numbers from a hospital or a medical tourism destination, take them with a pinch of salt (or perhaps a sack of salt). And do some basic “hospital” mathematics. If they’re claiming let’s say 200,000 medical tourists a year, ask them where they are putting all the patients.

Let’s put this number into perspective. The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital in London is the largest specialist orthopaedic hospital in the UK. It’s a very busy and successful hospital. Last year, it admitted around 10,000 patients to its 220 beds. That’s around 45 patients per bed per year. So, 200,000 “real” medical tourists might need....4,400 beds....and hospital beds are hard to find in many countries.

So how do we fix the problem?

When the UK NHS publishes statistics on hospital performance (See Hospital Episode Statistics Online), every set of statistics it publishes has a “responsible statistician”. He’s the one who ensures that they’re comparing apples with apples.

Let’s appoint a “responsible statistician” for medical tourism. Any volunteers out there?


View the original article here

Comparing the costs of (accidental) medical tourism

Whereas much of the attention in the medical travel sector is focused on medical tourism (i.e. where the primary reason for travel is some form of surgery or treatment), a more established and mature market sector is the provision of healthcare services for the tourist or business traveller who falls ill when abroad.

The structure and maturity of this sector means that it is far easier to gather comparative data such as the cost of healthcare and actual treatment in different countries. Cost management is in the hands of the international insurers, the travel insurance companies and the assistance companies who negotiate prices with hospital providers worldwide.A recent analysis of travel insurance claims, published by the UK based travel insurer, Sainsbury’s Travel Insurance, provides an insight into the variation in hospital costs across the world and the rising trend in hospital costs.

According to their analysis:
In 2009, a record number of people needed medical treatment whilst abroad.The most expensive country for inpatient hospital treatment was the United States, with the average hospital visit costing £6,000.The average cost of hospital treatment in a foreign country has climbed to £2,040 over the last 12 months, an increase of 6.25% year-on-year.The most significant increase in treatment costs were seen in Turkey (+10%), the USA (+10%) and Spain (+7.5%).Over the summer months (May to September), the most common reason for hospitalisation was gastroenteritis with the average bill for inpatient treatment amounting to £1,200. The most expensive hospital bills were for those who suffered a heart attack abroad, resulting in medical expenses that averaged £12,500.

It’s interesting that the international assistance companies who deal with these "accidental" medical tourists have shown little or no interest in entering the medical tourism business. They have everything in place to become the world’s number one facilitator and blow everyone else out of the market:

They have a network of “approved” hospitals around the world.They facilitate treatment for thousands of international patients in foreign countries every day.They have call centres to deal with patient enquiries.They have extensive technology and systems to manage the patient process.They have people on the ground in major destinations who can provide local support.They have comparative data on treatment outcomes and comparative costs in hospitals around the world.

So, why haven’t companies like Europ Assistance, Mondial Assistance and AXA Assistance entered the medical tourism market and used their expertise to attain a dominant market position?

The answer is probably quite simple. The medical tourism market is just not big enough to be attractive to them, nor worth the hassle. Which is good news for the existing operators...but puts the medical tourism market opportunity in perspective compared to the long established international assistance market.


View the original article here