Federal Budget October 2022
Healthcare sustainability
National Health and Climate Strategy
Croakey Conference News Service
Croakey Professional Services
Planetary Health Equity Hothouse 2024
#CroakeyLIVE #DigitalNationBuilding
#CroakeyLIVE #VoiceForHealth
#CroakeyGO #NavigatingHealth
Environmental determinants of health
Social determinants of health
Commercial determinants of health
Disasters and extreme weather events
Bushfire-emergency 2019-2020
Donor-funded journalism – 2024
Donor-funded journalism – 2023
Donor-funded journalism – 2022
Donor-funded journalism – 2021
Donor-funded journalism – 2020
lutruwita/Tasmania 2024 election
United States election 2024
Community controlled sector
Cultural determinants of health
Social and emotional wellbeing
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD)
Non communicable diseases
Asylum seeker and refugee health
Health policy and systems
Health financing and costs
National Health Performance Authority
Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme
Strengthening Medicare Taskforce 2022
National Commission of Audit 2014
Australian Medical Association
Emergency departments and care
International medical graduates
Safety and quality of healthcare and aged care
Health & medical marketing
Misinformation and disinformation
Public interest journalism
Social media and healthcare
Croakey Funding Drive June 2024
Public health and population health
Australian Centre for Disease Control
National Preventive Health Agency
#PreventiveHealthStrategy
#UnmetNeedsinPublicHealth
Health and medical education
Health and medical research
Croakey Conference News Service 2013 – 2023
Equally Well 2022 Symposium
Choosing Wisely National Meeting 2022
#HealthClimateSolutions21
#IndigenousClimateJustice21
Australian Palliative Care Conference
#AusCanIndigenousWellness
Population Health Congress 2015
CRANAplus conference 2014
Cultural Solutions - Healing Foundation forum 2014
Lowitja Institute Continuous Quality Improvement conference 2014
National Suicide Prevention Conference 2014
Racism and children/youth health symposium 2014
Rural & Remote Health Scientific Symposium 2014
Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation Forum 2013
Australian Health Promotion Association Conference 2013
Closing the Credibility Gap 2013
CRANAplus Conference 2013
Health Workforce Australia 2013
International Health Literacy Network Conference 2013
National Rural Health Conference 2013
Oceania EcoHealth Symposium 2013
Croakey Professional Services archive
#CommunityControl Twitter Festival
Healthdirect Australia series 2019
Lowitja Indigenous knowledge translation series
#CroakeyFundingDrive 2022
#CroakeyLIVE #Budget2021Health
#CroakeyLIVE #USvotesHealth
#CroakeyLIVE Federal election 2022
Croakey register of influence
Croakey Register of Influencers in Public Health
Croakey Register of Unreleased Documents
CroakeyGO archive 2017 – 2018
#CroakeyGO #QuantumWords 2018
#CroakeyGO #VicVotes 2018
#CroakeyGO Callan Park 2018
#CroakeyGO Carnarvon 2018
#CroakeyGO Marrickville 2018
#CroakeyGO Palm Island 2018
#CroakeyGO Melbourne 2017
#CroakeyGO Newcastle 2017
Elections and Budgets 2013 – 2021
#AusVotesHealth Twitter Festival 2019
Private health can certainly lead to quicker health outcomes, rather than years of delay in the public system.
There’s a hint that this may be the case, at least for some patients, from a study of all patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in WA between 1993 and 2003. Published in the MJA in 2007, it found an association between treatment in a private hospital and better survival rates. The authors acknowledged that their findings are not proof of cause and effect, but noted that the private patients had increased access to chemotherapy: only 45% of patients with Stage III disease who were younger than 75 received chemotherapy in public hospitals, compared with 67% of similar patients in private hospitals. The authors concluded:”If these observed improvements are a result of superior treatment, and not just patient selection, then they raise serious concerns regarding equity and access to treatment.” http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/186_06_190307/mor11121_fm.html
Melissa, the problem with public health systems is that it is inevitable that treatment will be rationed. Although I accept the premise of public health – i.e. people should not have to die because they can’t afford a doctor – only so many people will be able to be treated with the limited funds available. It is a bottomless pit of money due to the very high demand.
People who choose private health care do so because you can choose your own hospital, doctor and have your own room in many cases. It also allows you to bypass the sometimes extreme waiting lists in the public system for elective surgery. Some might perceive that as higher quality, but it’s mainly of higher convenience to the patient.
When I was working in the public system some time ago, I can’t recall a time when chemotherapy wasn’t given when the consensus was that it should have been used. They used protocols. I don’t think cost or resources were a factor. I note that the authors of the paper referred to admit to not being able to determine the cause of the better outcomes but hypothesised that it may be due to superior treatment, and provided evidence this may be the case. But it could be that the healthier ones are more likely to go private (say higher social class, non-smokers, non-drinkers etc) and got chemo because they were healthier and better able to cope without complications. And because they were healthier for a start they had better outcomes.
Mark Ragg asks: “Does anybody have direct evidence that either private health insurance or private health care, per se (ie. disentangled from wealth, education and so on) leads to better health outcomes?“ Is this really the question to ask? Is it not: if there were no private care and what is currently spent on private care were transferred to the public system, would we be a healthier country?
I don’t have “evidence” to answer this question but I am very confident that the answer must be yes. But I may be wrong so ‘twould be good to get a study done to provide this evidence. Would the private health insurers put up the money to fund it, I wonder? After all if answered in the negative it would make such a strong case for private care.
And a PS to Generic Person. All treatment is rationed whether public or private; the only difference is the mechanism – price or time.
In the modern health system there are large classes of clinical work, such as most of dentistry, and the non-psychotic mental illnesses, that public hospitals don’t do, so by definition the private sector offers superior care: the alternative is no care at all!