Replies to LegCo questions
LCQ8: Samaritan Fund
Following is a question by the Hon Albert Ho Chun-yan and a written reply by the
Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (in the absence of
the Secretary for Food and Health) in the Legislative Council today (May 23):
Questions:
In 2010-2011, the safety net of the Samaritan Fund (SF) covered 17 self-financed
drugs (the drugs) and the number of patients receiving SF subsidy on drugs was
about 1 350 (with 720 of them receiving full subsidy and the other 630 receiving
partial subsidy). The Government plans to revise the financial assessment
criteria of SF, and it is estimated that this can benefit 2 300 patients (i.e.
an additional 1 000 patients). In this connection, will the Government inform
this Council whether it knows:
(a) the situation of provision of SF subsidy under the existing financial
assessment criteria, including:
(i) in each of the past five years, the respective numbers of patients receiving
full and partial subsidy, the total number of patients receiving subsidy, the
average subsidy amount per patient, the average contribution amount per patient,
as well as the total subsidy amount for each type of drug, broken down by drug
type;
(ii) the number of patients receiving partial subsidy in each of the past five
years, broken down by drug type and tier of maximum patient's contribution; and
(iii) how it has come to the projection that revising the financial assessment
criteria may benefit an additional 1 000 patients; the numbers of patients
receiving partial subsidy at present who will become eligible for full subsidy,
those whose contribution to drug cost will decrease, and those who will become
eligible for subsidy under SF, after the revision in the financial assessment
criteria;
(b) the respective numbers of cases which had been formally rejected (i.e. cases
of applicants being turned down after they had been assessed by medical
practitioners as having a need for the aforesaid drugs, had been referred to
medical social workers (MSWs) and had filled out and submitted application forms
to SF with the assistance of MSWs) and cases which had been informally rejected
(i.e. cases of applicants being verbally turned down by the MSWs concerned after
they had been assessed by medical practitioners as having a need for the
aforesaid drugs and had been referred to MSWs) in the past five years; and
(c) the clinical criteria adopted by medical practitioners for assessing
patients' needs for the 17 drug items; whether the Hospital Authority had
consulted any patient group in the course of formulating those criteria?
Reply:
President,
The Samaritan Fund (SF) provides financial assistance to needy patients who meet
the specified clinical criteria and pass the financial test to meet expenses on
self-financed drugs or privately purchased medical items needed in the course of
medical treatment but are not covered by the standard fees and charges in public
hospitals and clinics.
My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
(a) The number of patients suffering from illnesses which require the use of
self-financed drugs covered by SF each year varies from several tens to a few
hundred. The average amount of patients' contribution to drug expenses each year
is affected by the patients' financial situation, clinical conditions and dosage
used during the year. The relevant figures can only be used for reference and do
not reflect the price of the drugs and its trend. As the relevant figures for
2007-08 and 2008-09 are kept in the archive of the Hospital Authority (HA), such
figures are not readily available and will take time for compilation. Relevant
figures for the past three years are provided.
(i) In each of the past three years, for patients receiving drug subsidy, the
respective number of patients receiving full and partial subsidy and the total
number of patients receiving subsidy, as well as the average amount of subsidy
of each case approved, the average amount of patients' contribution of each case
approved for partial subsidy and the total amount of subsidy approved, with
breakdowns by drug type, are set out at Annex I.
(ii) In each of the past three years, for patients receiving partial drug
subsidy, the patients' contribution with breakdowns by each tier of contribution
amount and drug type are set out at Annex II.
(iii) The number of patients receiving SF subsidies on drug was about 1 350 in
2010-11 (with 720 receiving full subsidy and 630 partial subsidy). With the
relaxation of the financial test, using the deductible allowance for a 4-member
household (i.e. around $400,000) as the average for the purpose of estimation,
it is estimated that about 2 300 patients using the 17 drugs covered by SF will
be better off after the introduction of the deductible allowance for disposal
capital. These 2 300 patients include patients who are receiving partial subsidy
and will become fully subsidised, patients who will contribute a smaller amount
of the drug cost, and patients who will become newly eligible for the SF
subsidy. Moreover, those who are currently enjoying full subsidy from SF will
continue to benefit. Since the number of patients who are receiving partial
subsidy and will become fully subsidised, those who will contribute a smaller
amount of the drug cost and those who will become newly eligible for subsidy
will be affected by factors such as drug prices, clinical conditions of the
patients and dosage used etc, HA is not able to estimate the distribution of
these 2 300 patients among the above three categories of patients.
(b) The numbers of applications (including drug and non-drug subsidies) rejected
in the past three years are set out below. As the assessment criteria for the
financial test of SF had been relaxed in the past, there had been a continuous
drop in the numbers of applications rejected over the past few years.
Numbers of applications rejected
2009-10 32
2010-11 23
2011-12 11
(c) In formulating clinical and medical criteria, HA will listen to the advice
of the relevant healthcare expert teams and take into consideration scientific
evidence of the relevant drugs, clinical experience, treatment outcomes,
international recommendations and practices, as well as the views of patients.
Since the implementation of the Drug Formulary in 2005, HA has been maintaining
liaison and communication with patient groups and proactively soliciting
patients' feedback on the Drug Formulary. In order to further enhance
transparency and engagement of patient groups, HA established in 2009 a formal
consultation mechanism under which annual consultation meetings on the Drug
Formulary and SF will be convened with patient groups. Patient groups will be
invited to give their views after the meeting. Their views and suggestions will
then be presented to the relevant drug committees for consideration.
To further enhance the engagement of patients, HA has since early 2011
established a new platform for the Chief Executive of HA to regularly meet with
patient representatives to gauge their views on various areas of patient
services. This new platform also serves as an additional liaison channel with
patients on matters relating to the Drug Formulary.
Ends/Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Issued at HKT 12:04
NNNN
Annex I
Annex II