New Users Registration  |  Useful Links  |  FAQ  |  Site Map 
 
Go Search

 

Skip Navigation LinksHealth Xchange > News
  News  
  Categories  
     
  Chronology  
 
  2013 2014   Dec 2014 | Nov 2014 | Oct 2014 | Sep 2014 | Aug 2014 | Jul 2014 | Jun 2014 | May 2014 | Apr 2014 | Mar 2014 | Feb 2014 | Jan 2014 |
  2013   Dec 2013 | Nov 2013 | Oct 2013 | Sep 2013 | Aug 2013 | Jul 2013 | Jun 2013 | May 2013 | Apr 2013 | Mar 2013 | Feb 2013 | Jan 2013 |
  2012   Dec 2012 | Nov 2012 | Oct 2012 | Sep 2012 | Aug 2012 | Jul 2012Jun 2012May 2012Apr 2012Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | Jan 2012 |
  2011   Dec 2011Nov 2011Oct 2011 | Sep 2011 | Aug 2011Jul 2011Jun 2011 | May 2011 | Apr 2011 | Mar 2011 | Feb 2011 | Jan 2011 |
  2010   Dec 2010 | Nov 2010 | Oct 2010 | Sep 2010 | Aug 2010 | Jul 2010 | Jun 2010 | May 2010 | Apr 2010 | Mar 2010 | Feb 2010 | Jan 2010 |
  2009   Dec 2009 | Nov 2009 | Oct 2009 | Sep 2009 | Aug 2009 |
 
     
  Topic  
 
  Health Policy and Announcements | Diseases and Outbreaks
  Medical Research | New Treatments and Technology
   
 
     
  RSS  
 
  Singapore   SingHealth | Health Promotion Board | Ministry of Health | Asiaone
  International   World Health Organization | Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
       
 
     
  News Article  
 

Doctors cannot issue guidelines on charges

 
  Friday, 20 l 08 l 2010 Source:  The Straits Times   
By: Melissa Kok
     
 

Competition watchdog’s ruling ends three-year bid to restore guidelines

sma fee guidelinesMEDICAL fee guidelines for doctors are out because they are anti-competitive, the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) has ruled.

The guidelines set by the Singapore Medical Association (SMA), on how much doctors in the private sector should charge for their services, had been voluntarily dropped by the SMA earlier, on advice that it could infringe the Competition Act.

During its three-year bid to restore the guidelines, the SMA had approached not just the CCS but also the Ministry of Trade and Industry.

The CCS formally notified the SMA of its stand yesterday, following a 1 1/2 year-long review.

In explaining its decision, CCS’ chief executive Teo Eng Cheong said price recommendations by trade or professional associations posed an anti-competitive risk.

Mr Teo said it was hard to set a price that can be considered at a “right or reasonable level”, and that price guidelines tend to cause a clustering effect among suppliers in the industry.

“If it’s set at $5, all the suppliers will supply this thing at $5. People who can cut their cost and supply at a lower cost will have no incentive to do so, because everybody is charging $5,” he said.

Coming in at close to 100 pages, SMA’s Guideline on Fees recommended pricing for some 1,500 services and procedures, such as consultation, medicine, prescription, medical reports, surgical procedures, and court appearances.

From the start, the SMA has argued that it provided transparency for patients in a market where information is heavily skewed towards the provider.

But a market study commissioned by the CCS over the past year has shown that private doctors can reduce their prices without the guidelines.

Since they were removed, professional fees in the private sector have come down slightly, by 2.6 per cent, after accounting for medical inflation.

The number of complaints received by the SMA on overcharging by doctors has also decreased: There were 26 complaints in 2007, 10 in 2008, and 14 in 2009.

Mr Teo noted there were a number of measures in place to provide safeguards for patients.

For example, restructured hospitals, which cater to eight out of 10 patients, supply real-life bills which are published online and provide a true benchmark for pricing (http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/billsize.aspx?id=302).

SMA voluntarily scrapped its guidelines in April 2007 so as not to contravene the Competition Act, which had come into effect the previous year.

In 2008, it appealed to the Ministry of Trade and Industry to exclude its guidelines from the Act. That appeal was turned down in June, with the ministry saying that the fees guide risked anti-competitive behaviour and would do little to keep health-care costs down.

The SMA also submitted a separate application in February last year to the CCS to decide if the guidelines would infringe the Competition Act. The CCS said it would take no further action now since no new guidelines have been issued by the SMA since 2007.

SMA president Chong Yeh Woei told The Straits Times he respected the CCS’ decision, which he said has brought closure to a “long-drawn” affair.

When asked why the SMA had continued to fight to keep the guidelines, Dr Chong said: “We believed that the guidelines worked very well. Our case to CCS was that it helped to reduce chances of overcharging, and it kept fees down below inflation.”

He added: “It is obvious that the Guidelines on Fees has seen its day... it has outlived its usefulness.” Going forward, Dr Chong said he hoped the Government would continue to use its regulatory powers to increase price transparency in the medical sector.

As for the 20 per cent who use private sector hospital care, and medical tourists, he said: “If we don’t protect them... we may erode trust between the profession and the patient.”

SMA will have two months to appeal against the CCS’ decision.

Dr Chong confirmed it would consult its legal advisers, but added: “In all probability, we will not appeal because the odds are stacked against us.”

     
  Ask the Specialists - Free Doctor Q&A  
    Previous Q&As
Check out our archive for all our previous doctor's Q&As!
*Latest Update: About LASIK
 
e-Appointment Online
Health Buddy App