Search

Objective: Telepsychiatry items in the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) were expanded following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, their out-of-pocket costs have not been examined. We describe and compare patient out-of-pocket payments for face-to-face and telepsychiatry (videoconferencing and telephone) MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services to understand the differential out-of-pocket cost burden for patients across these modalities. Methods: out-of-pocket cost information was obtained from the Medical Costs Finder website, which extracted data from Services Australia's Medicare claims data in 2021–2022. Cost information for corresponding face-to-face, video, and telephone MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services was compared, including (1) Median specialist fees; (2) Median out-of-pocket payments; (3) Medicare reimbursement amounts; and (4) Proportions of patients subject to out-of-pocket fees. Results: Medicare reimbursements are identical for all comparable face-to-face and telepsychiatry items. Specialist fees for comparable items varied across face-to-face to telehealth options, with resulting differences in out-of-pocket costs. For video items, higher proportions of patients were not bulk-billed, with greater out-of-pocket costs than face-to-face items. However, the opposite was true for telephone items compared with face-to-face items. Conclusions: Initial cost analyses of MBS telepsychiatry items indicate that telephone consultations incur the lowest out-of-pocket costs, followed by face-to-face and video consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Australian federal government introduced additional Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth-items to facilitate care by private psychiatrists during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: We analysed private psychiatrists' uptake of video and telephone-telehealth, as well as total (telehealth and face-to-face) consultations for April 2020–April 2021. We compare these to face-to-face consultations for April 2018–April 2019. MBS-Item service data were extracted for COVID-19-psychiatrist-video- and telephone-telehealth item numbers and compared with face-to-face consultations for the whole of Australia. Results: Psychiatric consultation numbers (telehealth and face-to-face) were 13% higher during the first year of the pandemic compared with 2018–2019, with telehealth accounting for 40% of this total. Face-to-face consultations were 65% of the comparative number of 2018–2019 consultations. There was substantial usage of telehealth consultations during 2020–2021. The majority of telehealth involved short telephone consultations of ⩽15–30 min, while video was used more, in longer consultations. Conclusions: Private psychiatrists and patients continued using the new telehealth-items during 2020–2021. This compensated for decreases in face-to-face consultations and resulted in an overall increase in the total patient contacts compared to 2018–2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Australian Federal government introduced new COVID-19-Psychiatrist-Medicare-Benefits-Schedule (MBS) telehealth-items to assist with providing private specialist care. We investigate private psychiatrists' uptake of telehealth, and face-to-face consultations for April–September 2020 for the state of Victoria, which experienced two consecutive waves of COVID-19. We compare these to the same 6 months in 2019. Method: MBS-item-consultation data were extracted for video, telephone and face-to-face consultations with a psychiatrist for April–September 2020 and compared to face-to-face consultations in the same period of 2019 Victoria-wide, and for all of Australia. Results: Total Victorian psychiatry consultations (telehealth and face-to-face) rose by 19% in April–September 2020 compared to 2019, with telehealth comprising 73% of this total. Victoria's increase in total psychiatry consultations was 5% higher than the all-Australian increase. Face-to-face consultations in April–September 2020 were only 46% of the comparative 2019 consultations. Consultations of less than 15 min duration (87% telephone and 13% video) tripled in April–September 2020, compared to the same period last year. Video consultations comprised 41% of total telehealth provision: these were used mainly for new patient assessments and longer consultations. Conclusions: During the pandemic, Victorian private psychiatrists used COVID-19-MBS-telehealth-items to substantially increase the number of total patient care consultations for 2020 compared to 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Australian federal government introduced new COVID-19 psychiatrist Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth items to assist with providing private specialist care. We investigate private psychiatrists' uptake of video and telephone telehealth, as well as total (telehealth and face-to-face) consultations for Quarter 3 (July-September), 2020. We compare these to the same quarter in 2019.Method: MBS-item service data were extracted for COVID-19-psychiatrist video and telephone telehealth item numbers and compared with Quarter 3 (July-September), 2019, of face-to-face consultations for the whole of Australia.Results: The number of psychiatry consultations (telehealth and face-to-face) rose during the first wave of the pandemic in Quarter 3, 2020, by 14% compared to Quarter 3, 2019, with telehealth 43% of this total. Face-to-face consultations in Quarter 3, 2020 were only 64% of the comparative number of Quarter 3, 2019 consultations. Most telehealth involved short telephone consultations of ⩽15-30 min. Video consultations comprised 42% of total telehealth provision: these were for new patient assessments and longer consultations. These figures represent increased face-to-face consultation compared to Quarter 2, 2020, with substantial maintenance of telehealth consultations.Conclusions: Private psychiatrists continued using the new COVID-19 MBS telehealth items for Quarter 3, 2020 to increase the number of patient care contacts in the context of decreased face-to-face consultations compared to 2019, but increased face-to-face consultations compared to Quarter 2, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Australian Commonwealth Government introduced new psychiatrist Medicare-Benefits-Schedule (MBS)-telehealth items in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic to assist with previously office-based psychiatric practice. We investigate private psychiatrists' uptake of (1) video- and telephone-telehealth consultations for Quarter-2 (April–June) of 2020 and (2) total telehealth and face-to-face consultations in Quarter-2, 2020 in comparison to Quarter-2, 2019 for Australia. Methods: MBS item service data were extracted for COVID-19-psychiatrist-video- and telephone-telehealth item numbers and compared with a baseline of the Quarter-2, 2019 (April–June 2019) of face-to-face consultations for the whole of Australia. Results: Combined telehealth and face-to-face psychiatry consultations rose during the first wave of the pandemic in Quarter-2, 2020 by 14% compared to Quarter-2, 2019 and telehealth was approximately half of this total. Face-to-face consultations in 2020 comprised only 56% of the comparative Quarter-2, 2019 consultations. Most telehealth provision was by telephone for short consultations of ⩽15–30 min. Video consultations comprised 38% of the total telehealth provision (for new patient assessments and longer consultations). Conclusions: There has been a flexible, rapid response to patient demand by private psychiatrists using the new COVID-19-MBS-telehealth items for Quarter-2, 2020, and in the context of decreased face-to-face consultations, ongoing telehealth is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Private practice psychiatry in Australia was largely office-based until the Commonwealth Government introduced new psychiatrist Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth items in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigate the uptake of (1) video and telephone telehealth consultations in April–May 2020, and (2) the overall changing rates of consultation, i.e. total telehealth and in-person consultations across the larger states of Australia. Method: MBS item service data were extracted for COVID-19 psychiatrist video- and telephone-telehealth item numbers and compared with a baseline of the 2018−2019-financial-year monthly average of in-person consultations for New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, and Western Australia. Results: Total psychiatry consultations (telehealth and in-person) rose during the first wave of the pandemic by 10%−20% compared to the previous year. The majority of private practice was conducted by telehealth in April but was lower in May as new COVID-19 case rates fell. Most telehealth provision was by telephone for short consultations of ⩽15−30 min. Video consultations increased from April into May. Conclusions: For large states, there has been a rapid adoption of the MBS telehealth psychiatrist items, followed by a trend back to face-to-face as COVID-19 new case rates reduced. There was an overall increased consultation rate (in-person plus telehealth) for April−May 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To analyse the smaller Australian state/territory service impact of the introduction of new COVID-19 psychiatrist video and telephone telehealth Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items. Method: MBS item service data were extracted for COVID-19 psychiatrist video and telephone telehealth item numbers corresponding to the pre-existing in-person consultations for the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), Northern Territory (NT), South Australia (SA) and Tasmania. Results: The overall rate of consultations (face-to-face and telehealth) increased during March and April 2020, compared to the monthly face-to-face consultation average, excepting Tasmania. Compared to an annual monthly average of in-person consultations for July 2018–June 2019, total telepsychiatry consultations were higher for April than May. For total video and telephone telehealth consultations combined, video consultations were lower in April and higher in May. As a percentage of combined telehealth and in-person consultations, telehealth was greater for April and lower for May compared to the monthly face-to-face consultation average. Conclusions: In the smaller states/territories, the private practice workforce rapidly adopted COVID-19 MBS telehealth items, with the majority of psychiatric consultation shifting to telehealth initially, and then returning to face-to-face. With a second wave of COVID-19 in Australia, telehealth is likely to remain a vital part of the national mental health strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Following a very rapid and significant uptake of metropolitan telepsychiatry in private practice in Australia during COVID-19, practical questions remain: How long should psychiatrists continue telepsychiatry? Are there benefits of continuing: reduced COVID-19 risks to patient and psychiatrist, and flexibility of appointments? Will the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth items be retained? How does metropolitan telepsychiatry fit into the overall mix of public and private services? This is an important debate.Conclusions: Private psychiatrists may continue to offer the majority of care, where practical, via telepsychiatry to reduce COVID-19 exposure risks, as well as allow for the realities of practice management for pandemic public health measures. However, consideration has to be given to the potential drawbacks for patients with sight, hearing and illness-related disabilities or risks, when in-person consultation is required. There are also risks: some patients may not benefit from telepsychiatry due to the nature of their illness, and will patients feel rapport is lost? However, the retention of COVID-19 MBS telehealth items is needed for ongoing flexible and comprehensive private practice psychiatry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This paper discusses issues arising from the rapid implementation of metropolitan telepsychiatry in private practice during the Covid-19 public health emergency.Conclusions: The relatively rapid uptake of private practice metropolitan telepsychiatry may further increase flexibility of the options for appointments through ongoing broad telepsychiatry access after the Covid-19 crisis. Telepsychiatry can be used to facilitate the temporary provision of psychiatric care, and has benefits and risks, but is not a longer-term replacement for the interpersonal richness of face-to-face consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]