BristolUK

Yes, that looks interesting...just a case of how much the cassettes cost.

I found a website advertising 100 (2x50) for $85.99 so looks about the same, unless this is a promotional price.

scilly

One thing to remember is that you can claim medical expenses on your income tax ............ as long as the total claimed amounts to more than 3% of net income.

Usually the lower income earner claims the medical expenses for the whole family ............. if, of course, there are two earners.

Our provincial medical coverage plus Extended coverage from SunLife does not cover everything even for us pensioners .............. there is a $1,000 deductible and then SunLife covers from 70-100% of various drugs. OH can then claim the excess amounts we have to pay when he files his income tax.


Always buy medications in increments of 3 months if on a long-term prescription .......... you then only pay 1 dispensing fee instead of 3

In BC, the dispensing fee is $10 each time ............. so I save $20 by getting my long term medications only every 3 months.

plasticcanuck

Perhaps I should add that the cassette comes in two sizes 50 and 100 strips. My drug store ordered the 50size but I'll ask them to get the 100size next time around. I saw an advert for the machine (can't remember where) and ordered it online for FREE. Also ordered a free leather case for it. I'm very pleased with it.

Stinkypup

The pharmacists earn the big bucks on the strips which is why they give the meters away for free. Patients without benefits are strictly limited as to the number of strips that they can get. Ridiculously expensive. Fancy schmancy meters maybe but a a serious financial cost.

DandNHill

My hubby's plan is with Sun Life. 99% of drugs are 100% covered but I managed of course to be prescribed something that wasn't covered.

It varies hugely from one plan to the next but this one is the best we've had so far. Dental was amazing too at 100% except for cosmetic treatment like crowns.

What I would say though is compared to the UK Canada seems to be much more on the ball regards treating diabetics.

Stinkypup

How so? Treatment for diabetics in the UK is not dependent on ability to pay unlike here. Great if like you they have benefits but a large group do not and cannot afford crucial medications which are horribly expensive and are often only covered by private plans -definitely a two tier system. I don't see that as better any way one looks at it. You personally might be able to get what you medically need but a large proportion of the population can't

DandNHill

I don't mean on the drug front but on the care. They just seem to understand it better and have offered him a lot more tests and treatments than in the UK.
That being said he never had the experience of having a toe amputated in the UK.

Stinkypup

Drugs are a huge part of it, impossible to dismiss this I'm afraid. Diabetics are a high priority in the UK , GPs have to meet high targets to achieve certain payments and if they don't then their quality assessments are rated very badly and the practices are given poor scores.
I dont see that patients are offered more tests/ treatments, what specifically? I'm not trying to be arsey but am interested in someone who has the condition's experiences but again your family clearly has excellent extended benefits which might just give you a rosier view.

Canadian diabetic care I feel is certainly not ahead of UK- huge amounts of UK research is used to determine best practice throughout the world.

You very rarely see patients in the UK requiring amputations, dialysis and going blind due to diabetic retinopathy ... Canada, ? Sadly all too common.

scrubbedexpat091

It can be tough for those without excellent extended benefits.

nativenewyorker

From a personal point of view I found the care to be better in the UK. Things like checking injection sites, sensation in the feet and blood flow in the feet were checked at every visit whereas they have never been checked here. Might just be my doctor of course.

Almost Canadian

I agree with this. While I appreciate it may be location dependent, my NHS diabetic treatment in the UK was far superior to the AHS treatment I have received in Alberta.

BristolUK

I've been lucky until now. Sort of.

Because my late wife needed $7k a time infusions every 6 weeks this put our total medical costs (there were plenty of other things too) above our income and once we'd passed through all the hoops and over the hurdles, it meant the province paid, except for co-pays, including insulin and supplies.

It was a grossly inefficient way of doing things and it meant getting more than was needed. Occasionally I'd not order any to try and balance it out and it didn't seem right getting too much but every time I did it there was a risk of interrupting coverage because it would appear we didn't need it.

Because of this I still have test strips left and I have only just needed to pay for some needles.

I have different drug coverage now (run by Blue Cross), which is good, but it doesn't pay for supplies, so needles and strips are a major expense.

Both big pharmacies here do a seniors discount but one of them - Lawtons - does it at age 55, so I qualify. It's a 20% reduction and it happens that they are cheaper than Shoppers so I'll be able to get 100 needles for $30 and 100 strips for $63. Of course that's only 25 days worth but better than $130 at the local pharmacy.

Crowns are not necessarily cosmetic. With decay, sometimes there's not enough 'tooth' on it's own and a crown can make it a full tooth again. In turn that helps protect the teeth either side.

I remember reading that until 3 or 4 years ago, those folk on social assistance in this province couldn't get help with a filling. The province would pay for removal but not pay for a filling that could keep the tooth functional. How backward is that?

I know you've said care rather than prescription drugs but it is worth pointing out that even where you get the drugs covered (in part or in full) you may still be on the hook for the means to inject and test.

In the UK, people with diabetes (irrespective of income) not only get all prescriptions covered (even the non diabetic ones) but they get the supplies too.

If there is a level of care "better" in Canada, perhaps it's because the patients in the UK have less of a need given they are far more likely to have access to the means of good control.

Stinkypup

I think part of it is that general practice in the UK has a clinical team, nurse practitioners, nurses, health care assistants, emergency practitioners. We had an amazingly thorough NP who dealt with the bulk of chronic disease management.

Nurses are often way more systematic and often more thorough than us docs. -they follow treatment and assessment protocols and therefore foot screening etc are done as you say every visit. Over here we should and I regularly check feet in diabetics but I'm sure that isn't universal.

In Canada the system is ridiculously Doctor centred. We have a chronic disease nurse who comes twice a week to our office but patients are suspicious and a little dismissive which is quite sad. They aren't use to it. It is a culture thing I fear.

I think that it is good to work in teams. It doesn't make sense for us to do Pap smears, ear syringes dressings etc Unfortunately the way that we are remunerated doesn't encourage multidisciplinary teams which would I feel provide better care for our patients.

scrubbedexpat091

Sounds nearly identical to how things worked when I had Kaiser in the US.

Depending on why you were there you would either get a PCP, NP or RN.

Best part I liked about Kaiser is they permitted self referral to certain specialists, like a psychiatrist, so you didn't need to see the PCP first, could just call and make the appointment directly.

Stinkypup

That is sometimes clear cut but not every patient who asks to see a psychiatrist actually needs to see one so I dont think that the GP referral is a bad thing. We can filter those patients and treat them ourselves, or say point them to counselling or relevant groups, psychologists if they have coverage etc Those that need to see a psychiatrist by our judgement will then be prioritised as to need - we write an appropriate referral letter, or contact the clinician directly if there is something severe/acute that needs urgent assessment.

If we left it to the patients to decide then waiting times would be even longer than they are already are and as you know, they are long enough already. Remember, UK and Canadian systems are publicly funded so not limitless resources.