This week we flagged concerns about proposed changes to the Medical Cost Finder website.
Our submission on proposed changes to the health legislation amendment Bill (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) highlights our concerns about a number of aspects of the website including the intention to publish a single annual “average fee” for each medical practitioner on the website and the absence of a robust process to have inaccurate information on the website corrected. It also highlights the lack of consultation with the medical profession on the proposed changes.
In a media statement , Federal AMA President Dr Danielle McMullen said the proposal to publish a single figure won’t deliver meaningful or fair transparency for consumers, given the diversity of clinical practice.
“This could disadvantage both consumers and medical professionals because there are so many factors impacting fees, including insurer-hospital agreements and the complexity of cases a non-GP specialist may handle.”
Dr McMullen said many private non-GP specialists provide discounts to patients because of their age or financial circumstances and an average fee (particularly an average based on previous year’s data) may be misleading.
Some non-GP specialists also treat patients with more complex conditions and the additional time needed to treat these patients may result higher fees.
Our submission also highlights the lack of a clear process for doctors to correct information if it is wrong or to have any remedy if incorrect information causes damage to their reputation or the viability of their practice.
We have consistently emphasised that transparency can only be achieved if the information published provides a complete and accurate picture of the factors driving patients’ out-of-pocket costs.
The submission also advocates for all relevant information to be published at the same time. The Bill enables additional information, including private health insurer rebates, to be published but this should be done at the same time other information is published, and not in tranches where medical practitioner fees are uploaded first and insurance rebates are added at an undefined later date.
