RESUMO
Objective To elucidate the policy implications of recent trends in the funding of radiotherapy services between 2009-10 and 2021-22. Method We use national aggregate claims data to determine time trends in the fees, benefits and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of radiotherapy and nuclear therapeutic medicine claims funded through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) program. All dollar figures are expressed in constant 2021 Australian dollars. Results Radiotherapy and nuclear therapeutic medicine MBS claims increased by 78% whereas MBS funding increased by 137% between 2009-10 and 2021-22. The main driver of Medicare funding growth has been the Extended Medicare Safety Net, which has increased by 404%. Over the 13 year observation period, the percentage of bulk-billed claims peaked in 2017-18 at 76.1% but fell to 69.8% in 2021-22. For non-bulk billed services, average OOP costs per claim increased from $20.40 in 2009-10 to $69.78 in 2021-22. Conclusion Despite increased Medicare funding, patients face increasing financial barriers to access radiation oncology services. Policies with regard to funding radiotherapy services should be reviewed to ensure that services are easily accessible and affordable for all those needing treatment and at a reasonable cost to Government.
Assuntos
Gastos em Saúde , Radioterapia (Especialidade) , Idoso , Humanos , Austrália , Programas Nacionais de Saúde , Honorários e PreçosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare within-country variation of health care utilization and spending of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and diabetes across countries. DATA SOURCES: Patient-level linked data sources compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care across nine countries: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Patients were identified in routine hospital data with a primary diagnosis of CHF and a secondary diagnosis of diabetes in 2015/2016. STUDY DESIGN: We calculated the care consumption of patients after a hospital admission over a year across the care pathway-ranging from primary care to home health nursing care. To compare the distribution of care consumption in each country, we use Gini coefficients, Lorenz curves, and female-male ratios for eight utilization and spending measures. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all countries, rehabilitation and home nursing care were highly concentrated in the top decile of patients, while the number of drug prescriptions were more uniformly distributed. On average, the Gini coefficient for drug consumption is about 0.30 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.36), while it is, 0.50 (0.45-0.56) for primary care visits, and more than 0.75 (0.81-0.92) for rehabilitation use and nurse visits at home (0.78; 0.62-0.9). Variations in spending were more pronounced than in utilization. Compared to men, women spend more days at initial hospital admission (+5%, 1.01-1.06), have a higher number of prescriptions (+7%, 1.05-1.09), and substantially more rehabilitation and home care (+20% to 35%, 0.79-1.6, 0.99-1.64), but have fewer visits to specialists (-10%; 0.84-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of health care consumption in different settings varies within countries, but there are also some common treatment patterns across all countries. Clinicians and policy makers need to look into these differences in care utilization by sex and care setting to determine whether they are justified or indicate suboptimal care.