RESUMO
The practice manager contacted the general practitioner's medical defence organization for advice. The practice manager was told that, from a legal point of view, there was no obligation on the practice to utilize any reminder system for routine investigations, although the practice may consider that the use of a reminder system was a useful service to offer their patients and part of good quality care. In this case, the adviser informed the practice manager that there was no legal duty to take any further action to 'remind' the patient that her Pap test was now due. Indeed, all Australian states and territories have cervical screening registers that can provide reminders to patients about Pap tests.
Assuntos
Dever de Recontatar/legislação & jurisprudência , Medicina de Família e Comunidade/organização & administração , Sistemas de Alerta/legislação & jurisprudência , Adulto , Austrália , Feminino , HumanosRESUMO
This study sought to determine whether fitting a more aggressive seat belt reminder system to new vehicles would be cost-beneficial for Australia. While seat belt wearing rates have been observed around 95% in the front seat, non-wearing rates in casualty crashes are as high as 33% among persons killed and 19% among seriously injured occupants. Benefits were computed for three device options (simple, simple-2 and complex) and three introduction scenarios (driver-only, front seat occupants and all occupants). Four levels of effectiveness were assumed, from 10% to 40%, depending on the type of device fitted. Unit benefits were computed assuming a 5% discount rate and a 15yr fleet life. Various industry experts provided the costs. The findings showed that Benefit-Cost-Ratios ranged from 4.0:1 at best (simple device for the driver only) to 0.9:1 for all seating positions. These figures are conservative, given the assumptions made and the discounted human capital methods used.