You may have heard that the AMA has been highly critical of the Government’s proposed new plan for care for people with diabetes.
Their plan involves capped payments to general practices, it means patients are asked to forfeit their Medicare entitlements, and there is no guarantee that patients would always be under the care of their usual doctor.
We think there is a better way to provide this care.
The AMA plan calls for patients to have streamlined access to GP-referred allied health services and a range of other support services.
Our plan focuses on the patient’s clinical needs and ensures more support is available to patients who need it.
Our plan calls for better subsidies so that patients can more easily access the ‘other than GP’ services they need for the management of their ongoing conditions.
Our plan is for all patients with chronic conditions, not just people with diabetes.
We know our plan is better. We have urged the Government to trial our plan against theirs to see which works best for patients.
I think we’d win. What do you think?
The Government Diabetes plan
The Government Diabetes plan is a just another attempt at introducing a British NHS capitation system-start with Diabetes and gradually involve everyone. I think the AMA has a better plan and streamlining access for Diabetics and other chroinc conditions to their allied health needs would help.
why is townsville more rural than mackay
why is no-one commenting about the "rurality scale". What bright bean counter in Canberra decided that Townsville with a university and 100's of specialists is more rural than Mackay( apparently because it is further away from Brisbane.)Similarly Charters Towers and Townsville are the same rurality. How can rural areas attract doctors when obviously rural areas are not given any loading???Do the politicians know any towns north of Newcastle??? Not even the rural doctors are talking about it
Future of General Practice
I still see no promise of support from either party for run-of-the-mill General Practice. There is plenty of funding for Superclinics and specific larger reforms while PIP payments and medicare rebates are being slowly whittled away. The last boost we had was prior to two elections ago when both parties were handing out offerings to GPs. Now we have silence for the last, and this, election. Come on Pollies, does the rank and file GP deserve to go under??
BEST PLAN FOR MANAGING DIABETES PATIENTS
The AMA plan certainly has some merits. Chronic disease management best practice needs a summit in my view. There may be some good intentions in the Government capitation scheme but it is shameful they did not consult adequately at all with the profession before releasing their poorly thought out and controversial scheme. Where is the GP Unity Group in all this?? Does it really help for the AMA to stand aloof of the implementation committee?? As both an AMA Member and active Division person, I don't like some of the AMA attack on the AGPN ( the same old !) - again we deserve a summit debate with all the many experts and advisors to come up with a better plan. Surely that is possible. I still don't know what the Coalition position is. I fear that both parties have backed off serious reform agenda for general practice. I only seem to hear of GP Super Clinics and Hospitals and EDs. That is ultrafrustrating and disappointing after all the Reform documents released in the last 12 months.Implementation has been virtually non-existent.
re after hours incentives
Surely removal of the after hours incentives in 2011 and setting up Medicare Locals is one of the most retrograde steps to hit general practice and our patients since provider numbers were initially rationed. This is going to push more patients into already crowded emergency departments as there will no incentive to provide out of hours care that we have always been providing in regional areas. Setting more hurdles to access out of hours care is a recipe for disaster. Does anybody listen or talk to coalface gps about these issues??
AMA forgets Specialist members
I refer to a recent e-mail from AMA president.
I am a rehab physician, pain medicine specialist and ambulatory care physician. I have been AMA member for many years but I really feel that we are left out of the agenda of AMA and governments. For example, government support e-Health for GP but nothing to the specialists. How can you talk about e-health if only GP, and hospitals have funding to develop e-health, but mostof the specialists cannot afford it?
You have been talking about Super GP clinics but have been ignoring a small group of specialist physicians working hard on Ambulatory care or hospital in the home programs etc, supporting patients in the community and GP, providing specialists care and keeping patients at home. Despite all the politician talking about keeping patients in community, there is little funding going to the Ambulatory Care services, despiting the phenomenal increased workload of these services. I believe there are already enough attention to support the GPs but what is needed is further development of full multi-disciplinary Ambulatory Care service to support GP and patients in community both in metropolitian and rural areas.
Chronic pain is a hugh silent problems and costly to the community. A lot of funding is needed to support the multi-disciplinary specialist pain service to deal with this problem. The waiting list of pain clinic is now about 3 years! Unfortunately it is very mentioned by the Politicians, and AMA presidents.
Similar problems occur in Rehabilitation Medicine. People keep talking about Aged care problem. But what about younger people with disability?
How can we talk about chronic disease management by involving only the GPs but forget about the specialist physicians who are serving the community patients?
I really don't understand why I am still a member of AMA, or why any specialists remain a member of AMA. Maybe we should have another organisation for specialists, and let AMA represents the GPs
Regards,
Comment on the above specialist comment
I appreciate the frankness and honesty expressed. What he or she says is true. Specialists need a voice. One reason better Divisions of General Practice and the AGPN have been helpful to general practice and GPs is that there is an effective infrastructure and voice (pace the vocal critics of the AGPN !!) Yes the AMA needs to represent all the profession. It is good that there are forums like this to express opinions freely.
Peter Keith GP Wagga Wagga
Psychiatrist Medicare rebates need urgent adjustment
Thankyou for posting the comments regarding the need for medical specialists, other than GP's, to have a stronger support from the AMA. The plight of Psychiatrists in this regard has reached such a critical that our profession has moved into a Cheyne-Stokes breathing pattern. Many Psychiatrists are struggling with a huge dilemma regarding how to manage their bulked billed mentally ill patients, who are typically economically on a knife edge budget (yes, both the patient and psychiatrist), when the rebates (which were far too low to start with!) have not been linked to the se formula of increase that flow to say parlimentarians. I would like the AMA to assist me in a number crunching exercise that takes the Medicare rebates for the 4 psychiatric item numbers 302,304,306,308 and apply the % increases which have taken place in parlimentarians incomes from the rebates inception til now. I would then like to take these figures up my colleagues and meet with the candidates serious about getting a decent mental health strategy in place. Will the AMA help me in this pre-election endeavour asap?
Time-motion study= psychiatrist psychotropic workload is up350%
The evolution of psychotropic pharmaceutical interventions, antidepressants and antipsychotics and anxiolytics and hypnotics and anti-addictive products, over the last 20years has brought significant improvements in the outcomes and safety profiles for mentally ill patients. This burgeoning of available psychotropic agents has not only promoted greater outcomes for patients but has added a huge additional demand on the time taken by GPs and Psychiatrists to choose which agent best suits the patient, being mindful of the differential diagnosis, interactions with other medicines and negotiating this large new drug choice with both informed and misinformed patients that tend to be armed with a handful of downloaded psychiatric tablet side-effect blogs. Given that the practice of Psychiatry has been become ever more complex with added time and knowledge demands placed on Psychiatrists to negotiate the 'hills of happy pills' and interactions with consultant psych nurses and psychologists we need to explore funding models that embrace the monumental shifts in a contemporary Psychiatrist's daily practice. Models of twenty years ago are so outdated forbour profession that this medical art is in grave danger of becoming extinct and being replaced by 'apsychiatric' services(ie. Without Psychiatrists) which will be more expensive, less efficacious and certainly more hazardous mental health services for those that are inevitably less able, by way of mental impairments, to monitor and protect their rights to high quality mental health care. If present day psychiatrists now spend 350% more cerebral time working out drug regimes now compared to 20years ago then perhaps a pharma-Supertax levy on the pharma industry could fund a significantvupward adjustment in 302,304,306,308 to help keep bulk billing alive and viable for those that just cannot afford any gap payment ie invalid pensioners. Comments from other Psychiatrists please!
other psychiatrists invited!
Thank you for your comments
Thank you for your comments Dr Durrell. In the lead up to the 2010 Federal Election and beyond, the AMA is working on achieving better funding to support both psychiatrists and mental health support services. Kind regards, Andrew Pesce
Post new comment