Ontario’s private outpatient lab sector needs overhaul, say critics

Ontario’s system for funding private medical laboratories has been controversial since it was set up almost two decades ago.

Now, facing critics who have only gotten louder, the government may be considering reform. In her mandate letter after last year’s election, Premier Kathleen Wynne asked Health Minister Eric Hoskins to “explore opportunities to optimize quality and value in community laboratories.”

‘Community’ or ‘outpatient’ lab tests are ordered by doctors and nurse practitioners and include everything from blood sugar to kidney function to pregnancy tests. Across Canada, there are many different models for delivering these tests, involving public and for-profit providers.

In Ontario, a set number of government dollars is divided among seven companies. (The Ministry of Health hasn’t licensed a new private outpatient lab provider since the 1970s.) The government pays each company per test but decides the maximum amount of money each corporation can receive in a year. This cap is based on the company’s market share in 1996. We spoke to four laboratory executives and all said they always exceed their cap.

Effectively, this means that payments to private companies are fixed and “there’s no competition,” says Ross Sutherland, a registered nurse who has written a book about private lab companies in Canada.

Laboratory insiders in other provinces question Ontario’s system. “Human nature would have it that you won’t actually be as accommodating to the patient,” says Dr. Jim Cupples, a surgical pathologist with the Fraser Health Authority and former owner of a private lab in BC.

Canada’s Competition Bureau foresaw problems with fixed per-company “caps” back in 1997. The Bureau recommended against locking in each company’s market share, arguing the caps would “reduce the incentive to provide good service” and would “protect the less efficient firms.” (The government chose to go ahead with the cap system, saying funding to private labs shouldn’t be “prepared strictly from a competition policy perspective.”)

Gerard Kennedy, CEO of Toronto-based Alpha Laboratories, argues the Bureau’s fears have come to bear. Several private Ontario labs maximize profit by “cutting and reducing pickups,” he says, as well as by “restricting hours and staffing levels, increasing turnaround times for some tests [and] lowering notification criteria.” Additionally, companies have little incentive to innovate in new areas like genetic testing, says Kennedy, the spokesperson for Coalition for Ontario Lab Reform. (Kennedy’s interest is a vested one. By locking in each company’s historical market share, the caps make it difficult for Alpha and other small labs to expand.)

Sue Paish, the CEO of Lifelabs, Ontario’s largest lab company with a market share of almost 70%, vehemently disagrees with Kennedy. “The corporate cap does not diminish or incent innovation. What incents innovation is a company’s commitment to do the right thing,” she says. Paish adds that her lab offers services that many others don’t, such as home pick-ups of samples. Lifelabs also lets patients access test results and book appointments online, reducing the time they spend in a waiting room.

Paish also points out that the government recently introduced performance-based funds that are awarded only if a lab meets various patient access benchmarks. Still, these funds represent only eight per cent of the approximately $600 million the government spends each year on private labs.

An executive at Ontario’s second-largest lab also thinks the per-company caps should remain in place but adjusted to be more reflective of companies’ current testing volume, rather than their historical market share. With “open, crazy competition,” Naseem Somani, president and CEO of Gamma-Dynacare Laboratories, worries companies will spend excessive amounts on opening up new locations to out-compete rivals, rather than improving technology and quality.

In an email, government spokesperson Shae Greenfield explained the government has set up an advisory forum made up of “broad representation from the community, hospital and public health sectors; professional organizations; and Local Health Integration Networks.” This forum, he wrote, will “explore opportunities …for improved value, quality and access.”

Does Ontario’s private lab system need more competition?

The Ontario government’s reasons for bringing in per-company caps in the late 1990s simply don’t hold water today, many sources argue. According to the Competition Bureau document, the caps aimed to “encourage reduction in overall utilization” and to “ensure the viability of the laboratory system through reduced upfront costs.”

The idea that companies would control utilization by policing unnecessary ordering of tests “makes such heroic assumptions about the behavior of the companies,” says Christopher McCabe, a health economist at the University of Alberta. After they have sunk money into expensive equipment, IT systems and so on, it costs major lab companies very little to run individual tests, he says, so they aren’t likely to mind doing tests beyond what they’re paid for. (Interestingly, there could actually be a benefit to testing beyond the cap: Lifelabs, for one, has pointed to its annual volume increases to call on more government funding in the past.)

Furthermore, where private companies do have an incentive to reduce tests, they would want to discourage tests with the lowest profit margins, not necessarily the most inappropriately ordered ones, McCabe argues.

Richard Hegele, a professor of laboratory medicine and pathobiology at the University of Toronto, adds that private laboratories aren’t likely to embark on the research necessary to recommend against certain tests, as they’re not paid for such research. The high-profile example of the Ontario government delisting vitamin D tests, he points out, was based on research undertaken by the government.

The second argument for the per-company caps – that they prevent companies from gaining so much market share that new entrants can’t compete – also doesn’t make sense today, says McCabe. Given the high costs of testing equipment and robotics, and the long-term efficiency dividends they bring to companies that can go big, the laboratory industry is one that “naturally leads to a monopoly,” McCabe says. But, he argues, this isn’t something to be feared in a single-payer system where “the monopoly power can be regulated in such a way to stop it from being abused,” he says. For example, if the provider cut services or raised fees, the government can make laboratory services public or call on companies to bid on the contract, he adds.

Edmonton is currently doing just that. Last year, four providers put in their bids to deliver lab services for the region. Tammy Hofer, vice president of laboratory services at Alberta Health Services, said the model gives patients “access to proprietary innovations” in areas like genetic and other complex testing. The vying international corporations have already invested in these technologies, ones that, as a small province, Alberta “doesn’t have the purchasing power” to access otherwise, she says. Edmonton’s upcoming contract has, however, been heavily criticized. As the leading contender is an Australian company, many fear profits and jobs will go out of the country.

Is Ontario overpaying for outpatient laboratory services?

In the absence of competitive bidding to ensure low prices, it’s up to the government to set its per-test prices. But the government’s price list is inflated and outdated, many sources told us. While the price of the odd test has been adjusted, most of Ontario’s test prices haven’t changed since 2001.

Meanwhile, technology has been rapidly changing, making most tests much cheaper. According to US data, the cost per weighted unit of laboratory analyses decreased by 45% between 1998 and 2010. Most of the private labs in Ontario have found cost savings by “automating the crap out of their labs,” and consolidating testing and collection sites, according to Kris Bailey, CEO of In-Common Laboratories, a non-profit that provides various services to hospital and community labs in Canada.

We don’t know how Ontario’s spending on community labs compares with other provinces. The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) isn’t able to compile this information, partly because outpatient and inpatient tests are defined differently across the country, explains Adam Rondeau, senior analyst at CIHI.

According to several sources, however, a review of private laboratory spending, involving auditing firms Deloitte and KPMG, has been ongoing since 2010. The government confirmed a review is ongoing but said the audit reports are not public due to their “sensitive nature,” as Greenfield put it.

Paish says she’s been “grilled” by the auditors but admitted that the ongoing review is the first in “many, many years.” Indeed, in a 2007 report, the Auditor General criticized the Ministry for failing to “analyz[e] the underlying actual costs of providing laboratory services so that this information could be utilized in negotiating the fees to be paid for private laboratory services.”

Why can’t the public sector compete?

In addition to lacking competition and having an out-of-date per-test fee schedule, many criticize Ontario’s outpatient lab system for excluding the public sector. Ontario is the only province where the private sector is expected to provide all outpatient tests.

In BC, according to Dr. Cupples, competition between the public and private sectors in the community lab sphere has led to “both being more available, more responsive to patient needs.” As one example, public labs in BC use software developed by the private sector that allows patients to view lab test results electronically. Meanwhile, public sector presence has spurred Lifelabs to expand hours and access points to compete, Dr. Cupples says.

The other reason to allow the public sector in community laboratory testing is that it can fill in gaps left by private companies in rural and northern areas, argue advocates like Bailey and Sutherland.

This gap-filling seems to be happening in BC. According to Dr. Cupples, the private sector provides the lion’s share of community laboratory testing in urban areas, while the public sector does at least 70% of the work in the interior.

In Ontario, meanwhile, private labs ship samples from rural areas to central processing facilities, Sutherland says. “So if a family doctor is worried about someone and needs a lab test processed quickly, they have to send them to the [local hospital’s] emergency room,” he explains. Because the hospital isn’t paid for the outpatient tests, it comes out of their overall budget, representing an added, unfair cost for rural hospitals, adds Bailey.

In short, the Ontario government has serious challenges to address regarding outpatient laboratory testing. The per-test fees haven’t substantially been updated in over a decade, despite cost savings brought about by rapidly evolving technology. Private lab companies appear to have little incentive to provide more accessible service to Ontario patients, and hospitals are sometimes picking up the slack without adequate compensation.

Though he’s biased, Kennedy raises an important point. “The private sector imperative would be competitiveness in the public interest,” he says. “Otherwise, why are they there?”

The comments section is closed.

  • Margaret Tucker says:

    It seems odd that one company has a complete monopoly on lab tests in Ontario! The consumer has no choice! It has proven impossible to contact LifeLabs by phone and the same message is given over and over again.; they are very busy and call again at a different time! Not everyone wants to join or go online! Isn’t this company being sued! Are those who join also responsible in the end for costs if they are found guilty in this action? The people who work at the lab I go to are terrific.

  • Dan says:

    Had my blood taken and while waiting there, the nurse asked each patient. When was the last time you ate ? About half said, hour what is the point of taking a blood test then, profit only structure, means indifference to the well being of patients. Motive, obviously for profit only. Therefore Doctors are treating patients based on false information. This is reckless and callous treating someone for something they do not have, when the doctor can only go by information that is not reflective of the real state of the individual. Government only system and costs would certainly be lower now than what taxpayers paying now. 600, Million a year annual cost seems misleading to me.

  • Bill Dare says:

    -how is a lab accountable for their service delivery? While a college for individual professionals, how does it work for an organization.

    -my little, small issue but still and issue story – Dyanacare (ontario) promotes seeing results only, “free wifi” etc. yet later on line wants to charge for a yearly access. False advertising much less the basic principle of being able to know your own health care results. A pretty basic principle and apparently strategic direction for the Ontario Ministry of Health merrily lapsed as a key step for “Patients First”

  • Mohammed Osmani says:

    I don’t see any thing wrong with current system but I agree it should be improved with out letting it to be misused.

  • Emma says:

    Private laboratories provide quality work and pass the same accreditation standards as hospital laboratories. Private labs have medical doctors on staff with expertise in each discipline-microbiologists, pathologists, chemists etc. In general private labs are proactive and are always looking for the best technology to do the job most efficiently- because the funding is limited.

    The laboratory staff include highly competent medical laboratory technologists (MLT) who maintain their competency no different than other MLT working in the province on Ontario. Private labs have date information on their websites educating patients, healthcare workers and doctors on correct sample collection.

    They cannot bill OHIP for point of care testing- so they are at a huge disadvantage compared to hospital laboratories in rural areas. Hospital laboratories in remote areas have great difficulty attracting MLTs now because the majority of MLTs working in Ontario are starting to retire. In 2014 >50 of MLTs working in Ontario were >= 50 years old. (Canadian Institution for Health Information).

    In the end, it takes registered medical laboratory technologist (MLT) to work in a medical laboratory in Canada. MLTs are very hard working medical professionals who have great ideas to help solve some of the issues facing laboratory testing in Ontario. I would suggest that a working group of MLTs -from all sectors- be organized by the provincial government to work together to come up with some concrete ideas to improve healthcare for all.

  • dick steenstra says:

    I like the new LifeLabs initiative to provide clients with online test results. However, tests done by in house hospital labs and the other private labs aren’t on this system. This makes the tracking and analyzing apps associated with the LifeLabs initiative less powerful in a coming environment where the health consumer is best served when he or she is an active and equal participant in their health care.

  • Rayna Johnston says:

    As to the comment about booking appointments to reduce wait times, there are two things to consider. The number of available appointments is a fraction of the number of patients handled in a day. And while that limited number may not have to wait that means that those without appointments wait longer while those with get to go first.

  • Avril says:

    Out of the last 9 or 10 urine samples sent to life labs for my mother, all but one came back as contaminated, even though these samples were taken by nurses? I started taking the samples to gamma/dynacare and all samples were fine, and yielded accurate results.

  • Rick Betts says:

    Routine Laboratory testing can be provided more effectively at the point-of-care, diagnosing and treating while the patient is in the office raises compliance and reduces the overall cost of care. Canada’s providing agencies would benefit from reviewing POCT platforms and initiatives in provinces like Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan.

  • Anil says:

    Labs in Ontario used to be owned and operated by Pathologists, but most have been bought and amalgamated by the larger commercial labs. The problem with removing the CAP is that the playing field becomes unfair for the hospitals that have to do testing under a fixed budget while the private labs could and did bill for each test. This was unfair and penalized hospitals, so the CAP was introduced to level the playing field. I think it has worked well for Ontarians, by keeping costs under control.
    Back in 90’s some Hospital labs worked with commercial labs to send high cost tests to them for testing as there was cost saving to be realizing through economies of scale. Some of these labs employed fee staff and were highly automated labs to provide fast results. Today some tests are sent to specialized labs that can do the expensive testing at a lower cost. Doing all tests locally is a business decision that labs have to make after considering the cost of doing every test and the need locally. The cost of testing is huge (equipment, reagents, training staff and maintenance) and test equipment and reagent vendors. Like in drugs, it is hard to contain these costs.
    Hospital lab department have become very efficient, as well trained Medical Laboratory technologist (MLT) can identify when a test requires a repeat and not. MLT’s and Doctors at the hospital have access to the previous test results in there Laboratory information system. Private commercial labs could easily decide if a lab test is required by querying OLIS (Ontario laboratory Information system) or the Physicians could use the Online Viewers that these commercial labs offer( at a cost) to see previous lab tests.
    I am not convinced by the arguments tabled by Gerard Kennedy, CEO of Toronto-based Alpha Laboratories. I have been in labs for 25 years in the UK, Canada and US. Ontario model works VERY well.

  • BobM says:

    For years I have had INR tests every week at a private laboratory in Ontario and have my doctor’s permission to call the lab the next day for my results in case I have to adjust my daily Coumadin.

    Now this laboratory charges me $10 for them to accept my call for results…over $500 a year for a 2 minute phone call to get my results. Otherwise they tell me I have to make an appointment with my doctor, pay parking and wait in his clinic for an hour or two to see him.

    As a retired senior I can’t afford it and will have to cut my weekly tests back to monthly. The lab blames the Ontario government and not their own company greed to charge patients directly. They also said all the other labs are doing the same so don’t bother going elsewhere.

    • AS says:

      Bob – get your tests done at LifeLabs. As of a few months ago, you can get your results online – and free. They’ve been doing this is BC for about 8 years now and it is a wildly popular service, especially among seniors. Hope it helps.

  • Durhane Wong-Rieger, Consumer Advocare Network says:

    If outpatient lab testing were ambulance service, patients would be demonstrating in the streets demanding immediate reforms. This is a case of “what you don’t know can indeed harm you.” Because patients are not immediately aware of the impact of delayed, inaccessible, or unavailable lab testing, they have not exhibited a loud voice in the call for lab reform. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure that the public is aware of the current mess in the community lab sector, and patients are deliberately brought into the dialogue.

  • Hamish says:

    Pathologists, physicians whose primary duty is to the patient, should be the ones opening, owning and running labs in Ontario. The current arrangement is noncompetitive, unprofessional and focused primarily on bottom-lines.

    Opening “bids” to large multinational conglomerates, as Alberta has done, is not the answer either.

    Labs should be opened by pathologists who, after securing the proper infrastructure and passing strict regulations and inspections, would obtain a license to run the lab. This would particularly benefit small communities who often have to send their samples far away.

    I wonder if it is actually legal for Ontario to limit competition for lab licenses since 1970.

    What frustrates me most about this is that pathologists haven’t said a word about this arrangement that benefits only corporate and government interests. You’d think that the ones whose primary responsibility is lab would care about this kind of thing. Not surprising given the lack of pathologist competence we see in the news on a near monthly basis.

    • Will says:

      Private laboratories maintain laboratory accreditation in the same manner in which public laboratories do. They employ competent pathologists, medical microbiologist,chemists, medical laboratory technologists etc. All of these medical professionals maintain their competency in the same manner in which public laboratory staff do. Private laboratories score extremely well on peer assessment conducted by expert laboratory professionals mandated by provincial standards…. so I think you need to become more informed before making such inaccurate statements

  • tammy, rn says:

    I don’t think it is a good idea to have labs policing what tests are ordered! without the whole picture (that the ordering doctor has), there could be very serious lapses just to save money.

    • James Pookay says:


      Just ask physicians down in the US how much time out of their day or the extra staff they are having to employ just to deal with pre-authorizations for diagnostic tests, where faceless entities can deny a service to a patient they have never seen.

      Or look at the Limited Use system here in Ontario with the Ontario Drug Benefit formulary. I’m constantly getting LU authorizations days or sometimes weeks later when I prescribe medicines to after hours patients. I stare at the forms just hoping that the patient managed to somehow get the medication they needed instead of me waiting to input some stupid code.

    • Emma says:

      The OHIP requisition dictates which tests are available to order by the physician. The OHIP requisition needs to be looked at and updated by the Ministry of Health to help doctors order smartly.


Wendy Glauser


Wendy is a freelance health and science journalist and a former staff reporter with Healthy Debate.

Andrew Remfry


Republish this article

Republish this article on your website under the creative commons licence.

Learn more