The leaks have started, the little details of the federal government’s plans to rescue the health system are starting to filter out, with stories in newspapers hailing Health’s Shot in the Arm and Rudd to Cut Away Dead Tissue.

Am I doing it right?

But beneath the gushing promises of more beds and more money there are signs that the government is considering changing the way it funds hospitals.

NSW doctors support any measures that untangle the way health is currently delivered. There are too many layers of management, too much complexity in the funding, and not enough focus on patients. So we agree there are problems. But our starting point is that any solutions should be focussed on untangling the current mess.

The issue that has been floated where the devil will be in the detail is the proposal to change the way hospitals are funded from “block” funding to “activity-based” funding.

Currently, NSW hospitals are “block funded”, that is they get an annual budget and told to deliver a certain set of services. In other words, they are paid up front to meet a defined service. The problem in the current system arises if the “block” is not big enough or if the hospital is inefficient then the hospital can’t meet the demand for service.

When this happens we get bed closures, staff freezes and suspension of elective surgery for holiday periods, for example Easter becomes five weeks instead of five days.

Activity-based funding is designed to address this problem by funding hospitals only for the activities that they perform. Instead of getting a block grant they get an amount per activity, for example $1000 per hip replacement.

There are definitely some very good aspects to this funding model, the most important one being that if it is implemented well hospitals will get funded for the work they need to do, In other words, rather than running out of money before the end of the year as they do under the block funding model they will get funded for each patient who comes in the door.

Another potentially good point is that it will encourage inefficient hospitals to be more efficient. So if they get paid $1000 per hip replacement but it costs them $1200 then they will work hard to get their costs down. In the same way, efficient hospitals will be rewarded - if it costs them $900 to perform the operation they will get to keep the $100 difference.

That’s the theory, the bad news is that the practice might not match the worthy objectives.

There are two big time-bombs. The first is that bureaucrats hate the concept of uncapped funding models. The big theoretical advantage of activity-based funding is that it funds hospitals to do the work that needs to be done, if there are 1500 patients who need hip replacements then 1500 hip replacements will be funded; if there are 2000 babies born then 2000 deliveries will be funded.

The risk is that the bureaucrats will persuade the politicians that there is money to be saved by capping the number of activities that are funded, so rather than getting funded for each hip replacement, the hospital will get funding for a specified number each year

If these sounds like a minor detail, consider this: - how would you feel if the Government announced that there will be a cap on the number of consultations that your family doctor can bill Medicare for each year?

The second big risk is that the cost of each hospital activity will be determined by bureaucrats without regard to the actual cost of the activity - they might artificially determine that a hip replacement “should” only cost $800 when in fact it costs $1000 even in a highly efficient hospital.

A sub-set of this risk is that the teaching and research components of our public hospital work will not get taken into account in determining the cost of the activity.

It’s obvious that an operation in a NSW public hospital that puts time and resources into world-class research activities and employs a large number of doctors and nurses who are given time to learn from their seniors, or teach their juniors, will cost substantially more than an operation in a private hospital that has no research projects and trains no staff.

There is a huge risk that a funding model that does not account for these costs will overnight change our major teaching hospitals from world-class centres of excellence to sausage factories.

Activity-based funding is worthy of a public debate – but not if it involves a cap on the number of activities and not if it doesn’t take account of teaching and research.

Dr Brian Morton is President of AMA (NSW)

Most commented

28 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • T.Chong says:

      03:22pm | 02/03/10

      Good to see DR Morton advocating true socialism - an open purse, giving to people what they need, rather than giving only what a model (of care) says should be spent.
      Of course, conservative minded folk might not like to see the “no expense spared” approach to health care, but the world would be a far better place if 20 CT scanners, or 10 MRI scanners were purchased, rather than 1 second hand Abraham battle tank.

    • Brian Connor says:

      06:36pm | 02/03/10

      like Greece? Portugal, USSR, France? that socialist model is great…..works well

    • steve says:

      10:17pm | 02/03/10

      don’t forget UK and New Zealand
      If something is free it has no value and so is worthless
      the socialist model is to pay for the health care of those who can afford to contribute to the cost? yet another financial black hole, great idea?

    • George says:

      07:44am | 03/03/10

      @T.Chong - Shoot down the argument presented, fair call.  Granting that the ‘block’ funding has been in place, I see the merit in intorducing ‘activity based’ funding.  I am a bit concerned though about the plight of hospital support staff, will they be included in the general hospital operations when activity funding proposals are eventually presented?

      Does this mean that all the hospital adminsitration staff dead wood and oxygen thiefs who are NSW crown employees in our public hospitals shall be finally cut out?

    • Albie says:

      03:23pm | 02/03/10

      Well thought out piece. Comments on the two key statements regarding bureaucrats:

      1: “The risk is that the bureaucrats will persuade the politicians that there is money to be saved by capping the number of activities that are funded”

      I think when you say “bureaucrats” here you mean “Treasury/Finance bureaucrats”. Most of us on the coalface actually want to deliver money where money is needed and spend 80% of our time fighting it out with the number crunchers in the central agencies.

      I share your fear for this, but it’s almost inevitable - while an uncapped program could increase exponentially, the same cannot be said for the federal budget! This is one risk that I hope gets taken.

      2. “The second big risk is that the cost of each hospital activity will be determined by bureaucrats without regard to the actual cost of the activity.”

      This is a big risk, and I agree with your concern entirely.

      More and more the Federal Bureaucracy is staffed with “generalists” who have good research and analysis skills and an ability to pick up on subject matter quickly, but generally apply the same process for policies and programs across a wide range of subject matter. Subject matter specialists are discouraged and have fewer opportunities for career advancement - yet these are the very people that are needed for important new programs like this one.

      Many departments employ consultants to provide this subject matter expertise but the people working in consultancy firms are usually no better than the public servants they are preparing their (usually sub-standard) report for. And consultation is all well and good but if a Department does not have the technical expertise to fully comprehend the advice it is given through consultation, then it is simply not able to make the right decision even if it’s given the information that should enable it to do so.

      So what’s the answer? Lord knows. Let’s just hope someone really figures out a way to design policy in such a way that they actually meet community requirements and then design programs that really meet intent.

      I’m not holding my breath - but live in hope.

    • steviep says:

      03:23pm | 02/03/10

      Would that be Peter Garrett he’s practicing on or what is left over from his grand ETS scheme?

    • Brian says:

      03:43pm | 02/03/10

      haha - with persphone and T.Chong either side?

    • Louis McLennan says:

      04:34pm | 02/03/10

      Government hospitals being more productive. GET REAL

    • Dingo_aus says:

      12:23pm | 03/03/10

      Precisely.

      The way to improve health care outcomes for patients is to allow patients to buy the services from the doctor directly.  Without disincentives for the doctor like extra paperwork, fixed fees, government interference etc.

      Health care is not a right and shouldn’t be treated as such.  It requires someone to produce goods and services.  The only way someone can make this a “right” is by putting a gun to the heads of other people and forcing them to produce the goods and services.  Then what level of care do you get? USSR, Cuba, etc.

      Free Market capitalism has given us toasters at K-Mart for $10.  Producing Health Careis not different that producing any other goods or services.  Let the free market reign and watch outcomes improve and price decrease.

    • biff says:

      05:15pm | 02/03/10

      Actually Kev is in the process of conducting the solemn ALP ceremony known as the ‘laying on of hands’. It’s a budget version of beatification and if I’m not mistaken the person about to be blessed is none other than PJ Keating, still wearing his Mardi Gras outfit and prawn net over his head.

    • Browy says:

      06:34pm | 02/03/10

      If the PM can fix the hospital system then pigs can fly baby! Wakee up it is because of state labor we have a broken hospital system, and because kev rudd failed to take over the hospital system as promised with a great plan is why we continue to have a failing system.

    • Steve of Cornubia says:

      06:41pm | 02/03/10

      Two things are certain:

      1) This being the Rudd Labor Government, they will stuff this up.
      2) This being the Rudd Labor Government, no actual patient benefit will flow from the increased spending, because most of the extra spending will somehow end up in Labor state government coffers.

    • Jen from Nana Glen says:

      10:04am | 03/03/10

      Yes agree Steve.  If we just got rid of the top tier of bureaucrats, not just in health but in all government areas, we would come in on budget.  They cost a fortune and neither deliver a product nor any service!

    • ryan says:

      06:53pm | 02/03/10

      typical of the AMA….blame the bureaucrats, it’s always their fault.  what dr morton fails to mention is that in health, as in all government funded services, there is no such thing as an uncapped budget.  if you didn’t cap budgets, health could swallow the entire government budget leaving us without public education, police etc. 

      not only that, if you talked to just about any bureaucrat working in the public health system now, they are fierce advocates for universal health care who would tell you they are actually the ones arguing to government (the elected ones…you know the premier / minister / treasurer etc)  for more money to be directed to health. 

      unfortuantely the public expects everything for free (not just health care), so until there’s an endless pot of money, budgets in government-funded services will continue to be capped.

    • acker says:

      08:10pm | 02/03/10

      Dr Morton..I’m the chair of a Southern NSW LHAC.. we have NSW nurses driving over the border to work in Victoria in preference to NSW, and you in your Sydney suburbian utopia don’t think we have a problem !!!! For cripes sake..how out of touch are you !!

    • Robert Smissen says:

      09:00pm | 02/03/10

      Will it be called Hospital Watch just like grocery Watch &  Fuel Watch? ? Why do I feel that health in Oz is slowly but surely marching down the road to perdition.? ?

    • casba says:

      08:06am | 03/03/10

      Persephone, where are you?  We are awaiting your one eyed, but predictably supportive, response to your lord and master of the underworlds’ scheme. Surely you will follow him to the end of the earth-sorry , that should read underworld- and back!

    • persephone says:

      08:38am | 03/03/10

      Sorry, casba, waiting to hear what the policy actually says before I comment.

      And, honestly, can we get our mythology right? Persephone didn’t go willingly into the underworld.

      And I challenge anyone to find a post where I gush about Rudd, because I don’t.  I attempt to explain what’s going on with policy, and to correct errors of fact.

      For some reason, that gets up people’s noses. I suppose they’ve got fixed beliefs that they don’t want facts to get in the way of.

    • Bernie Tuch says:

      10:23am | 03/03/10

      The rot has already set in as regards research in the public hospital system.  In the South Eastern Sydney Illawarra Area Health Service, for example, research units have been axed and many research staff made redundant.  It takes decades to build centres of cutting-edge research, such as the Diabetes Transplant Unit and the Prostate Oncology Research Unit at Prince of Wales Hospital, but a much shorter period to demolish them.

    • Julian Thomas says:

      12:36pm | 03/03/10

      bernie try the “private” sector, they love risk, not!!

    • Afraid, very very afraid says:

      10:25am | 03/03/10

      If there is a set amount for say a hip replacement, and hospitals have to be more “efficient” to deliver that procedure for that set amount, what happens to patient care for complications?  Does the patient get sent home earlier than they should because to keep them overnight would push the total cost above that of the set amount? Do the risks inherent in the drive for efficiencies outweigh proper patient care? 
      I’m with George - all costs involved, from the doctor to the cleaner need to be factored in when looking at what a procedure really costs

    • H of SA says:

      10:53am | 03/03/10

      “More efficent” = poorer quality.

      “More efficent” = less nurses and doctors to provide care

      “More efficent” = longer waits for treatment

      “More efficent” = being sent back home earlier than you should.

      Its simple, our nations priorities are screwed. And we’d rather pay less tax so we can have afford a $7000 flat screen and the repayments on our 2 new cars this year.

      I’m all for whichever funding model is considered best practice from an evidence based approach. But if we would rather be rich than pay the tax required to be healthy its still going to be a messed up system. We are still going to have long waits for treatment and we are still going to have a decidedly “inefficient” constant re-training and hiring of staff due to the inevitable cycle of quitting a rehiring as a result of doctors and nurses burnt out by our “efficient” approach to paying tax.

    • Julian Thomas says:

      12:34pm | 03/03/10

      the “private” system couldnt afford me, or must of any health professionalism, funny how the “private” system in general hides away from most sectors, and how the coalition backs the “private” sectors that they have “private; equity in Uranium, Telecoms, etc , etc

    • Nicki says:

      12:39pm | 03/03/10

      We must vote in Abbott this election, then he will fix the system that he couldnt while he was Health Minister in Howard Government.
      When Liberal Coalition is in government we never have this kind of problems.
      Can’t wait for them to come back.

    • Cameron Price-Austin says:

      12:42pm | 03/03/10

      Isn’t teaching and research the domain of universities?

    • shere khan says:

      12:49pm | 03/03/10

      I am a Pensioner.
      I have written to a couple of Senators suggesting Pensioners could CONTINUE paying Medicare.  This would scupper Wayne swan’s nonsence about the necessity of increasing population to pay Pensioners.
      We Pensioners don’t want our City environments to be unrecognisable to us.  We want our Dinkum Australia that we grew up with.
      I have even written suggesting Medicare could be raised to 2 % of income.
      If this were so, it would cost me $225 a year.  I would willingly pay this to stop WAYNE SWAN’S mad idea of 40 million by immigration.
      I believe in Population Control Worldwide not moving them around.
      in 55 years 2 billion has grown to 6 billion!  In another 55 years if the trend is not STOPPED, 6 billion becomes 18 billion!  There will be NO SARDINES LEFT.
      WAKE UP EVERYBODY.

    • Jack says:

      01:39pm | 03/03/10

      Shere,  I suggest you go and see your doctor immediately.

    • casba says:

      04:10pm | 03/03/10

      @ Persephone
      Ah Persephone! I knew I would get a response.  Fair suck of the pomagranete seed (illuding to your love of the underworld)....clearly you have almost chocked on your own bile and froth….or hubris!  You have totally missed my intended subtlety and opted for the typical narcissistic response. However, I know you will certainly appreciate my other illusions to Greek Mythology!  It is not about you having one up on me and needing to correct me by giving me a lesson in Classical Greek Mythology.  I am actually an Ancient History teacher so I do know about how Persephone ended up in the underworld. But, like you, she never made it out of the underworld for more than half of the year and was always commanded back into its black hole of misery and despair. So, you see,  there is still time for you to see the light…six months till the election!  Just as it was for Persephone, so it is for the Labor Party… there is still time for them to arise from their stupor ,but don’t bet on it.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ToryShepherd: Onya, @KRuddMP“@newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/CFaHrxyV5G

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/2KEO6yEx5F

Daniel Piotrowski

True Rudd style. Bazillion word folksy statement

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @Rob_Stott: Like a lot of Republicans in the US, it's much easier to support gay marriage when you're no longer in a position to do anyt…

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter