Re: Copayments for general practice visits

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

In reply: Arnold regrets that the debate about copayments is restricted to fee-for-service methods of paying general practitioners.

This is true. The Minister for Health has intimated an overhaul of the whole general practice system, but this was not addressed in the recent federal Budget. This is a pity. It would be good to have a debate about different systems, ranging from our current blended model of fee-for-service with grants to practices for achieving quality indicators, through to capitation systems (eg, the United Kingdom's National Health Service) and salaries (common in public hospitals and in primary care in some countries).

Perhaps this is also a good moment to try to bridge the great divide between state health (mostly hospitals) and federal health (mostly general practice and private health care), which obstructs much of integrated care.

Tinkering at the edges with copayments seems too trivial.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Journal of Australia
Volume201
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jul 2014

Fingerprint

General Practice
Fee-for-Service Plans
Health
Federal Hospitals
Clergy
Organized Financing
Public Hospitals
Salaries and Fringe Benefits
National Health Programs
Budgets
General Practitioners
Primary Health Care
Emotions
Delivery of Health Care
United Kingdom

Cite this

@article{1ef51778ecf048eeabb58b38ce1e7ecb,
title = "Re: Copayments for general practice visits",
abstract = "In reply: Arnold regrets that the debate about copayments is restricted to fee-for-service methods of paying general practitioners.This is true. The Minister for Health has intimated an overhaul of the whole general practice system, but this was not addressed in the recent federal Budget. This is a pity. It would be good to have a debate about different systems, ranging from our current blended model of fee-for-service with grants to practices for achieving quality indicators, through to capitation systems (eg, the United Kingdom's National Health Service) and salaries (common in public hospitals and in primary care in some countries).Perhaps this is also a good moment to try to bridge the great divide between state health (mostly hospitals) and federal health (mostly general practice and private health care), which obstructs much of integrated care.Tinkering at the edges with copayments seems too trivial.",
author = "{Del Mar}, {Christopher B.}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "7",
doi = "10.5694/mja14.00714",
language = "English",
volume = "201",
pages = "28",
journal = "Medical Journal of Australia",
issn = "0025-729X",
publisher = "AUSTRALASIAN MED PUBL CO LTD",
number = "1",

}

Re : Copayments for general practice visits. / Del Mar, Christopher B.

In: Medical Journal of Australia, Vol. 201, No. 1, 07.07.2014, p. 28.

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Re

T2 - Copayments for general practice visits

AU - Del Mar, Christopher B.

PY - 2014/7/7

Y1 - 2014/7/7

N2 - In reply: Arnold regrets that the debate about copayments is restricted to fee-for-service methods of paying general practitioners.This is true. The Minister for Health has intimated an overhaul of the whole general practice system, but this was not addressed in the recent federal Budget. This is a pity. It would be good to have a debate about different systems, ranging from our current blended model of fee-for-service with grants to practices for achieving quality indicators, through to capitation systems (eg, the United Kingdom's National Health Service) and salaries (common in public hospitals and in primary care in some countries).Perhaps this is also a good moment to try to bridge the great divide between state health (mostly hospitals) and federal health (mostly general practice and private health care), which obstructs much of integrated care.Tinkering at the edges with copayments seems too trivial.

AB - In reply: Arnold regrets that the debate about copayments is restricted to fee-for-service methods of paying general practitioners.This is true. The Minister for Health has intimated an overhaul of the whole general practice system, but this was not addressed in the recent federal Budget. This is a pity. It would be good to have a debate about different systems, ranging from our current blended model of fee-for-service with grants to practices for achieving quality indicators, through to capitation systems (eg, the United Kingdom's National Health Service) and salaries (common in public hospitals and in primary care in some countries).Perhaps this is also a good moment to try to bridge the great divide between state health (mostly hospitals) and federal health (mostly general practice and private health care), which obstructs much of integrated care.Tinkering at the edges with copayments seems too trivial.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904464936&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5694/mja14.00714

DO - 10.5694/mja14.00714

M3 - Letter

VL - 201

SP - 28

JO - Medical Journal of Australia

JF - Medical Journal of Australia

SN - 0025-729X

IS - 1

ER -