Australia’s Medicare Locals are in a formative period, and any comparison so far has focused on the United Kingdom
The Australian and Canadian health systems share many similarities; one author has described them as “children of a common mother”.1 The fundamentals of the provision of primary care in both countries are the same: the overwhelming majority of “general practitioners” in Australia and “family physicians” in Canada work in independent practices, billing “Medicare” on a fee-for-service basis. The structure of family practice is similar, with a mix of solo and multiphysician practices. In Alberta, patients are not required to register with a single practice, but many family practices are not accepting new patients, and so registration with a practice is universally seen as desirable. There is no financial penalty (on the patient or the practice) for patients seeing a physician outside the practice in which they are registered. There are some differences; most notably that health care in Canada is essentially a provincial responsibility operating within overall parameters set by the Canada Health Act, and that “extra-billing” (billing above the schedule fee) is prohibited.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Crichton A. Children of a common mother: a comparative analysis of the development of the Australian and Canadian health care systems to 1995. Sydney: School of Health Services Management, University of New South Wales, 1998.
- 2. Canadian Institute for Health Information. Supply, distribution and migration of Canadian physicians, 2009. Ottawa: CIHI, 2010: 99. http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/products/SMDB_2009_EN.pdf (accessed Dec 2011).
- 3. National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. A healthier future for all Australians: final report June 2009. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2009. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/nhhrc-report (accessed Dec 2011).
- 4. McNally CA, Richards BH, Mira M, et al. Advancing general practice through divisions. Canberra: National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, 1995.
- 5. Smith J, Sibthorpe B. Divisions of general practice in Australia: how do they measure up in the international context? Aust New Zealand Health Policy 2007; 4: 15.
- 6. Australian Government. Improving primary health care for all Australians. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2011.
- 7. Scott A, Coote W. Whither Divisions of General Practice? An empirical and policy analysis of the impact of Divisions within the Australian health care system. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 95-99. <MJA full text>
- 8. Australian National Audit Office. Administration of primary care funding agreements. Canberra: ANAO, 2006.
- 9. Rayner F. Divisions’ body debt at least $1.2m. Australian Doctor 2004; 21 Jul. http://www.australiandoctor.com.au/news/57/0c027257.asp (accessed Mar 2011).
- 10. Hopt KJ. The German two-tier board (Aufsichtsrat): a German view of corporate governance. In: Hopt KJ, Wymeersch E, editors. Comparative corporate governence: essays and materials. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter; 1997: 3-20.
No relevant disclosures.