Medical tourism and bariatric surgery

What do we know about medical tourism? A review of the literature with discussion of its implications for the UK National Health Service as an example of a public health care system

BACKGROUND

Medical tourism is a growing phenomenon. This review of the literature maps current knowledge and discusses findings with reference to the UK National Health Service (NHS).

METHODS

Databases were systematically searched between September 2011 and March 2012 and 100 papers were selected for review.

RESULTS

The literature shows specific types of tourism depending on treatment, eg, dentistry, cosmetic, or fertility. Patient motivation is complex and while further research is needed, factors beyond cost, including availability and distance, are clearly important. The provision of medical tourism varies. Volume of patient travel, economic cost and benefit were established for 13 countries. It highlights contributions not only to recipient countries' economies but also to a possible growth in health systems' inequities. Evidence suggests that UK patients travel abroad to receive treatment, complications arise and are treated by the NHS, indicating costs from medical travel for originating health systems.

CONCLUSION

It demonstrates the importance of quality standards and holds lessons as the UK and other EU countries implement the EU Directive on cross-border care. Lifting the private-patient-cap for NHS hospitals increases potential for growth in inbound medical tourism; yet no research exists on this. Research is required on volume, cost, patient motivation, industry, and on long-term health outcomes in medical tourists.

Implications for the NHS of inward and outward medical tourism: a policy and economic analysis using literature review and mixed-methods approaches

Background

The study examined the implications of inward and outward flows of private patients for the NHS across a range of specialties and services.

Objectives

To generate a comprehensive documentary review; to better understand information, marketing and advertising practices; examine the magnitude and economic and health-related consequences of travel; understand decision-making frames and assessments of risk; understand treatment experience; elicit the perspectives of key stakeholder groups; and map out medical tourism development within the UK.

Design and participants

The study integrated policy analysis, desk-based work, economic analysis to estimate preliminary costs, savings and NHS revenue, and treatment case studies. The case studies involved synthesising data sources around bariatric, fertility, cosmetic, dental and diaspora examples. Overall, we drew on a mixed-methods approach of qualitative and quantitative data collection. The study was underpinned by a systematic overview and a legal and policy review. In-depth interviews were carried out with those representing professional associations, those with clinical interests and representative bodies (n = 16); businesses and employees within medical tourism (n = 18); NHS managers (n = 23); and overseas providers. We spoke to outward medical travellers (46 people across four treatment case studies: bariatric, fertility, dental and cosmetic) and also 31 individuals from UK-resident Somali and Gujarati populations.

Results

The study found that the past decade has seen an increase in both inward and outward medical travel. Europe is both a key source of travellers to the UK and a destination for UK residents who travel for medical treatment. Inward travel often involves either expatriates or people from nations with historic ties to the UK. The economic implications of medical tourism for the NHS are not uniform. The medical tourism industry is almost entirely unregulated and this has potential risks for those travelling out of the UK. Existing information regarding medical tourism is variable and there is no authoritative and trustworthy single source of information. Those who travel for treatment are a heterogeneous group, with people of all ages spread across a range of sociodemographic groups. Medical tourists do not appear to inform their decision-making with hard information and consequently often do not consider all risks. They make use of extensive informal networks such as treatment-based or cultural groups. Motivations to travel are in line with the findings of other studies. Notably, cost is never a sole motivator and often not the primary motivation for seeking treatment abroad.

Limitations

One major limitation of the study was the abandonment of a survey of medical tourists. We sought to avoid an extremely small survey, which offers no real insight. Instead we redirected our resources to a deeper analysis of qualitative interviews, which proved remarkably fruitful. In a similar vein, the economic analysis proved more difficult and time consuming than anticipated. Data were incomplete and this inhibited the modelling of some important elements.

Conclusions

In 2010 at least 63,000 residents of the UK travelled abroad for medical treatment and at least 52,000 residents of foreign countries travelled to the UK for treatment. Inward referral and flows of international patients are shaped by clinical networks and longstanding relationships that are fostered between clinicians within sender countries and their NHS counterparts. Our research demonstrated a range of different models that providers market and by which patients travel to receive treatment. There are clearly legal uncertainties at the interface of these and clinical provision. Patients are now travelling to further or ‘new’ markets in medical tourism. Future research should: seek to better understand the medium- and long-term health and social outcomes of treatment for those who travel from the UK for medical treatment; generate more robust data that better capture the size and flows of medical travel; seek to better understand inward flows of medical travellers; gather a greater level of information on patients, including their origins, procedures and outcomes, to allow for the development of better economic costing; explore further the issues of clinical relationships and networks; and consider the importance of the NHS brand.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Ethical and legal implications of the risks of medical tourism for patients: a qualitative study of Canadian health and safety representatives' perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Medical tourism involves patients' intentional travel to privately obtain medical care in another country. Empirical evidence regarding health and safety risks facing medical tourists is limited. Consideration of this issue is dominated by speculation and lacks meaningful input from people with specific expertise in patient health and safety. We consulted with patient health and safety experts in the Canadian province of British Columbia to explore their views concerning risks that medical tourists may be exposed to. Herein, we report on the findings, linking them to existing ethical and legal issues associated with medical tourism.

DESIGN

We held a focus group in September 2011 in Vancouver, British Columbia with professionals representing different domains of patient health and safety expertise. The focus group was transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven professionals representing the domains of tissue banking, blood safety, health records, organ transplantation, dental care, clinical ethics and infection control participated.

RESULTS

Five dominant health and safety risks for outbound medical tourists were identified by participants: (1) complications; (2) specific concerns regarding organ transplantation; (3) transmission of antibiotic-resistant organisms; (4) (dis)continuity of medical documentation and (5) (un)informed decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Concern was expressed that medical tourism might have unintended and undesired effects upon patients' home healthcare systems. The individual choices of medical tourists could have significant public consequences if healthcare facilities in their home countries must expend resources treating postoperative complications. Participants also expressed concern that medical tourists returning home with infections, particularly antibiotic-resistant infections, could place others at risk of exposure to infections that are refractory to standard treatment regimens and thereby pose significant public health risks.