Search

Background: In November 2017, the Australian government approved reimbursement for psychology consultations conducted by videoconference under the Better Access initiative to address inequitable access of mental health services across regions in Australia., Objective: This project uses publically available activity data from the Medicare Benefits Scheme to quantify the uptake of videoconference for psychology resulting from the initiative change., Methods: Data were extracted from the Medicare Benefits Schedule item reports using the item codes for standard consultations and the new item codes for videoconference consultations. Activity data from 2 years before and the first year of the change to the Better Access initiative were compared to examine the uptake of videoconference for psychology. Data were stratified by allied health profession, sex, age and state jurisdiction., Results: In the 1-year period after the introduction of reimbursed videoconference consultations, approximately 5.7 million in-person consultations and 4141 videoconference consultations were funded by Medicare in Australia. Videoconference consultations comprised 0.07% of the total consultations performed in that 1-year period and showed an increased trajectory. The results can guide future research into evaluating the clinical outcomes of patients via both in-person and videoconference delivery modes., Conclusions: Videoconference mental health services were used in the first year that they were available, although they only accounted for a small percentage of all mental health consultations provided by allied health professionals. This finding lays the foundation for future work which could examine the effectiveness of the scheme in reducing inequity and investigating the economic benefits of the expanded initiative to the government and society., (Copyright © 2019 ISPOR--The professional society for health economics and outcomes research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Taxation has been suggested as a possible preventive strategy to address the serious public health concern of childhood obesity. Understanding the public's viewpoint on the potential role of taxation is vital to inform policy decisions if they are to be acceptable to the wider community. A Citizens' Jury is a deliberative method for engaging the public in decision making and can assist in setting policy agendas. A Citizens' Jury was conducted in Brisbane, Australia in May 2013 to answer the question: Is taxation on food and drinks an acceptable strategy to the public in order to reduce rates of childhood obesity? Citizens were randomly selected from the electoral roll and invited to participate. Thirteen members were purposively sampled from those expressing interest to broadly reflect the diversity of the Australian public. Over two days, participants were presented with evidence on the topic by experts, were able to question witnesses and deliberate on the evidence. The jurors unanimously supported taxation on sugar-sweetened drinks but generally did not support taxation on processed meats, snack foods and foods eaten/ purchased outside the home. They also supported taxation on snack foods on the condition that traffic light labelling was also introduced. Though they were not specifically asked to deliberate strategies outside of taxation, the jurors strongly recommended more nutritional information on all food packaging using the traffic light and teaspoon labelling systems for sugar, salt and fat content. The Citizens' Jury suggests that the general public may support taxation on sugar-sweetened drinks to reduce rates of obesity in children. Regulatory reforms of taxation on sugar-sweetened drinks and improved labelling of nutritional information on product packaging were strongly supported by all members of the jury. These reforms should be considered by governments to prevent childhood obesity and the future burden on society from the consequences of obesity.