Search

Millions of Australians use the private health system every year. They should receive safe, high-quality, value-based care. However, poor policy and inadequate regulation of medical technology is driving low-value care at great expense to consumers and the broader health system. Key drivers include the Prescribed List of Medical Devices and Human Tissue, gaps in quality and safety controls for devices being used, and marketing and conflicts of interest. All of these should be addressed to reduce low-value care in Australia's private health system, so consumers are protected from harm and limited health budgets are used effectively. What is known about the topic? With health expenditure rising unsustainably, there is a growing focus on ways to reduce low-value care to improve health outcomes and eliminate unnecessary costs. What does this paper add? This paper details drivers of low-value care in Australia's private health system and recommendations to overcome them. Drivers include the Prescribed List of Medical Devices, gaps in safety and quality controls, and conflicts of interest and marketing. What are the implications for practitioners? These insights are relevant to clinicians, researchers, policymakers, consumers and health business leaders with an interest in low-value care. This article belongs to the Special Issue: Value-based Healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As we review health governance during the COVID-19 pandemic, we have an opportunity to reflect on these processes and ensure that future challenges might be managed in a more collaborative and whole of system response. This 'Perspective' reviews COVID-19 responses in Australia, reflects on a number of potential solutions that have been developed by organisations over the past two decades and proffers a governance framework for a Communicable Disease and Pandemic Management Authority that might assist health responses to future challenges. What is known about the topic? Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were at best disorganised with multiple failures at almost every level. Reflecting on these responses is essential if we are to perform better in future health and societal crises, which will inevitably occur. What does this paper add? This paper summarises a number of organisational 'structures' and discussion documents that have been developed over the past decades which might be useful starting points for development of a structure(s) that would leave Australia in a better position when the next 'wave' hits. What are the implications for practitioners? Good governance is fundamental to how we do business and the complexities of the health and welfare system(s) only compound these challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to quantify the utilisation of vascular access devices in Queensland public hospitals and their associated cost. Methods: Devices were broadly classified into peripheral intravenous catheters, central venous catheters and arterial lines. The number of catheters used was obtained from a central procurement department at Queensland Health and validated using Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) claims and/or hospital data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare for the same period. Resources consumed included equipment and staff time required to insert and remove catheters. Equipment costs were valued using negotiated hospital prices, and staff time was valued at the fixed industrial award wages in Australia or relevant MBS fees. Device maintenance costs (e.g. dressings) and costs of treating complications were excluded. Results: Approximately 2.75 million vascular access devices were used in public hospitals in Queensland in 2016, at a total cost of A$59.14 million. This comprised a total equipment cost of around A$10.17 million and a total labour cost of A$48.85 million Conclusion: Vascular access is an important component of healthcare expenditure. The present study is the first to characterise and cost vascular access devices in Queensland. Further research is needed on the costs of maintaining device function and of treating complications associated with vascular access. What is known about the topic?: The cost of vascular access in Australia has previously been estimated from modelling, using various assumptions, or based on device utilisation in other countries. What does this paper add?: For the first time, device utilisation for vascular access in Queensland has been quantified and costed. Results were obtained from reliable sources and validated against other databases. What are the implications for practitioners?: Practitioners and managers may now provide accurate estimates about the cost of catheter failure, a potentially preventable problem that affects up to 50% of all catheters placed. Attaching costs to such failure may also stimulate research into how to reduce the problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]