Universal Pharmacare in Canada: Analyzing Websites and Evaluating Opinion

This paper critically analyzes several websites that examine the trend of universal pharmacare in Canada and evaluates how they present relevant or irrelevant opinions. The main purpose is to determine if universal pharmacare is incomplete in Canada and leaving many patients with little or no coverage. The websites cover topics such as the need for universal pharmacare, limitations in the current drug plan, and recommendations to improve coverage.

Running head: NURSING
Nursing
Name of the student:
Name of the University:
Author’s note

1NURSING
Introduction:
This paper looks at the current trend of universal pharmacare in Canada. This initiative
includes coverage of prescription pharmaceuticals for all including the poor, the elderly and the
people facing economic challenges. This is an important system of insurance for important
medicines which aims to reduce barrier in access due to costly copayments. Such initiative is
likely to provide medications to millions of Canadian in need of important medicines for health
management (Phillips, 2016). The main purpose of this paper is to critically analyse several
websites that examines the trend in Canada and evaluate how they present irrelevant or important
opinion. The personal thesis statement for the topic is that universal pharmacare is incomplete in
Canada and this patchwork is leaving man patients with little or no coverage at all.
The following are the website and brief executive summary of each website:
1. https://www.ndp.ca/news/universal-pharmacare: This website introduces the concept of
universal pharmacare and explains the need for universal pharmacare. The website also
discusses the potential benefits of universal pharmacare for Canada and the plans to
address loopholes.
2. https://globalnews.ca/news/4153811/universal-pharmacare-recommendations/: The
Global news website gives an opinion on current issues and limitation in drug plan and
recommendation to improve the national drug formulary.
3. http://www.canadiandoctorsformedicare.ca/Table/Issues/Pharmacare/: This article mainly
defines how Canadian drug-plan sponsors can save money if they enhance coverage for
some commonly prescribed medicines.

2NURSING
4. http://www.bcchamber.org/policies/economic-benefits-universal-pharmacare-businesses:
This website brings forward the point that drug coverage in Canada is currently
fragmented and incomplete. The website discusses on the impact of these inefficiencies
on the goal of universal coverage as well as on Canada’s economy.
5. https://www.benefitscanada.com/news/a-primer-on-the-parliamentary-report-on-
pharmacare-and-its-impact-on-the-benefits-industry-118765: The websites also talks
about patchwork of Canada’s drug system. It discusses on two types of thoughts on the
issue. The one is related to better health outcome and other is related to potential cost
involved in care.
6. https://rnao.ca/sites/rnao-ca/files/Pharmacare_backgrounder.pdf: This website mainly
talks about universal pharmacare and its impact on oral care people living with low
income. It gives evidence regarding recent development and current points in investing in
oral health services.
Analysis of the website:
Authorship: The review of the authorship of each website is critical to understand the critical
value of the contents presented. The 1st article’s author is NDP (New Democratic Party) leader
Jagmeet Singh and details regarding the author are present in the NDP website. Details regarding
his previous position and current work as leader have been provided (Singh, 2018). His current
area of experience suggests the critical value of the information presented by him. The second
article has been written by Teresa Wright, a journalist of the Canadian press (Wright, 2018). She
is a famous journalist who is aware about latest development and trends in Canada. Although
there is no biographical link present in the website, however her position as a journalist informs
about the credentiality of the work. Just like the second website, the content of the third website

3NURSING
has also been published by a journalist named Carly Weeks (Weeks, 2017). However, lack of
any acknowledgment on author’s credentiality may influence the credibility of the content.
The fourth article has been published by the BBC Chamber of Commerce and it does not
mention the name of the author. Lack of detail on authorship affects the critical value of the
article. The fifth article defines the impact of pharmacare and this has been written by Sonya
Felix. The endnote of the article mentions that Sonya Felix is a Vancouver Island-based
freelance writer. The author’s credentiality is not appropriate and this may affect the reliability of
the content (Felix, 2018). The last article has been written by Michael Law, Fiona Clement and
Thy Dinh. Michael Law holds the Canada Research Chair in access to medicines and the Dr.
Fiona Clement is professor director of health technology assessment. Thy Dinh is the director of
Public Policy division. The former two author’s credentiality and professional position suggest
that they can provide valuable insight related to developments in pharmacare (Adams & Smith,
2017). In addition, the former authors command in the policy sector suggests that valid
information has been presented.
Verifiability or accuracy of the information:
The quality of the website content is dependent on accuracy or verifiability of the
information. This includes evaluating the manner in which the data was gathered or presented.
The review of data collection is relevant for research document. However, as this paper critically
reviews website articles, the accuracy of the source is judged by the acknowledgement of names
of individual or sources from which the information was obtained. The first article by Singh
(2018) discusses about ways to improve cost associated with universal pharmacare. The author
estimated that 28.5 billion dollars were spent on prescription drugs in Canada in 2015. Several

4NURSING
other figures related to cost of universal pharmacare program was mentioned. However, the
accuracy and quality of the data is affected by the lack of disclosure of the source of the
information. Lack of any bibliography or acknowledgment for source of the data influences the
applicability and reliability of the content. In case of the article by Wright (2018) too, no list of
bibliography exists. However, the data is considered accurate because the articles reports about
the declaration of the House of Commons health committee which does not require any support
with references. The article suggested improving the cost associated with care by sharing cost
between federal government and territories.
In contrast to the above two articles, the website article by Weeks et al. (2017) provides
accurate and verifiable content as it mentions the exact journal from which the information has
been taken. The strategy of adapting universal coverage for a common group of medication was
given in the Canadian Medical Association journal. Hence, the content can be verified by using
this journal. The accuracy of information or content is seen in the paper by BBC Chamber of
Commerce (2016) too as the website provides footnotes for the important information presented
in the article. Hence, by providing list of bibliography, the organization validates its work and
gives the chance to validate figures related to cost incurred by government on a universal
pharmacare program by reviewing the footnotes. Information from several reports and surveys
has enhanced the quality of the work.
In case of the fifth article by Felix (2018), the author’s credibility is ambiguous however
the accuracy of the source has been maintained by citing the source from where the drug
expenditure data has been taken. Otherwise, citation is not needed for the entire content because
the article proceeds with report and discussion presented by Canadian researcher and other
members of the House of Commons Committee. Based on accuracy parameters, the website

5NURSING
article by Felix (2018) is considered most effective as discussed about different points related to
the topic of universal pharmacare in Canada and each vital point has been backed up by relevant
list of bibliography and footnotes. The information presented can be easily reviewed or verified
by analyzing the citations for each source.
Compare and contrast of each website:
Content and organization of articles:
The main purpose of this paper is to review the current trend of universal pharmacare in
Canada by critique of websites covering the topic. The rationale was to find out the need for such
universal pharmacare, analyze challenges in the program and find possible solution to address
the gaps in universal drug coverage. The article by Singh (2018) is useful guide for those who
have no idea about the topic and want to quickly through the cause and effect aspect of universal
pharmacare. It gives a brief definition of universal pharmacare, the need for such program in
Canada, cost saving estimates and potential benefits for Canadians. Hence, this covers brief and
succinct information related to the issue. The content is also well-organized with systematic
headings. The significance of the article by Wright (2018) it provides information related to the
limitations found in current universal pharmacare program. However, the article is not complete
as leaves the question the way to make the national pharmacare plan more feasible. Despite this
limitation, the information presented in the website would help to understand the areas where
more work is needed to ensure that Canadians get access to medications for serious health
conditions. The second article does not have structured headings, however the content is
coherent.

6NURSING
In terms of organization of information in the website articles, the article by BBC
Chamber of Commerce (2016) and Felix (2018) have a well-structured content which is
interesting as well as easy to understand. Felix (2018) followed an interesting structure which
involved the using questions and heading to present the argument. This structure makes the
reader inquisitive. The article gave details regarding multiple issues in current drug coverage and
options to address issues. Similar content is found in the article by BBC Chamber of Commerce
(2016) too. BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) provided insight into economic benefits of
universal pharmacare for businesses and the article starts with first reporting about issues related
to pharmacological management with clear headings and then listing down the recommendations
to address the issue. The content is easy to follow and all the recommendation has been well-
rationalized with the review of limitations or factors affecting current progress in universal
health coverage. However, Weeks (2017) work is not well-organized and it is mainly presented
in a narrative format. The content of the article by Adams and Smith (2017) is very detailed and
comprehensive; however it is less likely to be followed by a layman.
Analysis of bias in content:
The review of the six articles indicated that there were some articles where the author
held biased opinion regarding the topic. For example, since the article was written by the leader
of NDP, the content of the article reflected leaning towards the New Democrats. The style of
writing revealed how the author supported New Democrats can support in closing tax loophole
and improve drug coverage in Canada. In case of the article by Weeks (2017), many of the
opinions were based on personal judgment and important sourced were not referred to justify the
need to modify universal pharmacare program. BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) provides a

7NURSING
balanced view on the topic by relying on real evidence based data to prove important points.
However, similar approach was not seen for other articles.
Consistency of content with other sources:
The comparison of the six articles indicates that there were three websites that
specifically focussed on issues associated with coverage and the solution to address challenges in
universal pharmacare (Wright (2018); BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) and Felix (2018).
However, how far the information presented is accurate and consistent with research literature
needs to be analyzed. Wright (2018) mentioned that cost associated with coverage would be a
challenge in implementing universal pharmacare coverage. BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016)
mentioned about unfragmented nature of coverage as many patients received pharmacare system
after they had already spent thousands of dollars on medicine. Hence, inequity and affordability
in drug coverage was identified as major issue in the three articles. This issue is consistent with
past research done on the topic as Morgan et al. (2015) mentioned variations in drug coverage by
province and patient group as major barrier for Canadians to take their medications as
prescribed. Despite availability of universal coverage, Canadians had to incur out-of-pocket cost
thus indicating slow progress towards universal public drug coverage in Canada. The increase in
out-of-pocket cost aspect has been covered by the article by Felix (2018) too. Hence, the issue
presented is reliable according to support with research literature.
Another issue presented by BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) was that it revealed the
impact of incomplete system of public drug coverage on business and Canada’s economy.
Research literature by Morgan et al. (2015) also reported that drug coverage in Canada is
incomplete and coverage of prescription drugs outside hospitals in Canada is neither universal

8NURSING
nor comprehensive. The research paper recommended provided medically necessary prescription
drugs at little or no direct cost to patient. Similar recommendation was also proposed by Weeks
at al. (2017) as the website articles mentioned the need for government to spend about $1.2-
billion to provide universal coverage for 117 essential medicines. The author also explained the
implication of such action by stating that this would increase the bulk purchasing power as cost
required to cover essential medicine will be too less. Hence, from the critical review of the
challenges in universal pharmacare mentioned in the website articles, it is formed that the
content is valid and reliable as similar results has also been found in research literature.
The first article provided a brief overview of the topics. However, it did not cover
controversies related to the topic which makes the website content incomplete and poor quality
of source. However, few website articles gave useful argument regarding challenges and
recommendation to address fragmented and incomplete drug coverage. One of the possible
solutions suggested by Wright (2018) to address cost related challenges in universal pharmacare
was to let federal government take on the cost-sharing responsibilities. However, this is not
consistent with research evidence as Blomqvist & Busby (2015) argues that if federal
government assumes cost-sharing responsibilities, this would lead to additional pressure on its
budget. Hence, the article failed to articulate the possible challenges with implementing the
solution. In addition, BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) gave the recommendation that through
bulk purchasing agreements and other strategies, the cost of pharmaceutical can be controlled.
However, one major gap found in all the article is that policy related changes to promote
universal pharmacare was not considered. Morgan et al. (2016) indicated policy action or policy
based reform as an effective step in improving resources required for coverage and improves
performance.

9NURSING
Personal opinion on the website:
Based on the critique of each website based on authorship, content and accuracy,
personal interpretation of the work is that universal drug coverage is indeed incomplete and
fragmented in Canada and bulk purchasing and shared cost is vital to ensure that people with
chronic disease condition gets necessary medication on time. For each website, I have certain
improvement areas as well as disagreement with their point. For example, the first website
(Singh 2018) is like brief manual that defines everything about universal pharmacare in Canada.
However, lack of bibliography or links for important information limits the quality of content. In
future, it is suggested that the site focus on acknowledgment of resource used for assignment.
Similar step also needs to be taken to improve the website content of Wright (2018) and Weeks
(2017). I agree with the way the website of BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016) has presented
the information on the topic. However, authorship element needs to be addressed. In case of
Adams and Smith (2017), as too many database points from the period between 1950s till present
time have been covered, the website should focus on illustrative graphs and diagrams to easily
put forward points to the reader.
Conclusion:
To conclude, out of six website, only two websites BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016)
and Felix (2018) gave valid and well-structured opinion on the topic. While searching for
articles, the approach to find those websites that gave idea about challenges in universal
pharmacare in Canada. The thesis statement for the work was that universal drug coverage in
Canada is incomplete in Canada and my selection of website articles helped to augment
information as per the thesis. Many supporting points related to the thesis were found.

10NURSING
References:
Adams, O., & Smith, J. (2017). National Pharmacare in Canada: 2019 or Bust?. Retrieved from:
https://www.conferenceboard.ca/temp/5ca43c6e-6810-4805-8538-
3f27e95e4467/9970_PharmaReform-RPT.pdf
BBC Chamber of Commerce (2016). ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF UNIVERSAL PHARMACARE
FOR BUSINESSES. Retrieved from: http://www.bcchamber.org/policies/economic-
benefits-universal-pharmacare-businesses
Blomqvist, A., & Busby, C. (2015). Feasible pharmacare in the federation: A proposal to break
the gridlock. Retrieved from:
https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/e-
brief_217_0.pdf
Felix, S., (2018). A primer on the parliamentary report on pharmacare and its impact on the
benefits industry. Retrieved from: https://www.benefitscanada.com/news/a-primer-on-
the-parliamentary-report-on-pharmacare-and-its-impact-on-the-benefits-industry-118765
Morgan, S. G., Gagnon, M. A., Mintzes, B., & Lexchin, J. (2016). A better prescription: advice
for a national strategy on pharmaceutical policy in Canada. Healthcare policy, 12(1), 18.
Morgan, S. G., Law, M., Daw, J. R., Abraham, L., & Martin, D. (2015). Estimated cost of
universal public coverage of prescription drugs in Canada. CMAJ : Canadian Medical
Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 187(7), 491-7.
Morgan, S. G., Martin, D., Gagnon, M. A., Mintzes, B., Daw, J. R., & Lexchin, J. (2015). The
future of drug coverage in Canada.

11NURSING
Phillips, K. (2016). Catastrophic drug coverage in Canada. Library of Parliament.
Singh, J., (2018). It’s Time for Universal Pharmacare in Canada. Retrieved from:
https://www.ndp.ca/news/universal-pharmacare
Weeks., C., (2017). With universal drug coverage, Canadians could save billions. Retrieved
from: http://www.canadiandoctorsformedicare.ca/Table/Issues/Pharmacare/
Wright, T., (2018). Universal pharmacare would provide better health care but costs a concern:
health committee. Retrieved from: https://globalnews.ca/news/4153811/universal-
pharmacare-recommendations/