The Australian Medical Association Limited and state AMA entities comply with the Privacy Act 1988. Please refer to the AMA Privacy Policy to understand our commitment to you and information on how we store and protect your data.



16 Aug 2017


I’d like to state my thanks for all the input and interest from PHD members at our recent National Conference. It was invigorating to experience your enthusiasm for the many issues directly affecting public hospital doctors. An important issue about which I do want to remind you is actually how you “describe” yourself for AMA membership purposes. In order to keep the CPHD vibrant and relevant to key issues, we must have a solid base.  Today we can choose our membership category more accurately.  I hope more doctors based in public hospitals, particularly those with a Specialist qualification, will choose to identify in the public hospital doctor membership category as opposed to their medical craft group if they have one, when it comes to identifying their AMA membership as you will be invited to do soon, and thus remain engaged with the CPHD.

Vale Dr Patrick Pritzwald-Stegmann

Multiple issues are before the CPHD.  None is more relevant than safety in the workplace.  On July 21, a Memorial Service was held for AMA member Dr Patrick Pritzwald-Stegmann, who died after substantial time ventilated in one of our ICUs after an alleged “coward’s punch” received in the foyer of a Melbourne metropolitan public hospital resulted in a profound brain injury.  This is now a Coroner’s and police matter.  I am regularly horrified at the experiences of violence in our community and our workplaces, but this is all the more poignant for me as Patrick was a recent close colleague of mine with whom I had worked extensively. 

There are many intersecting issues in our community, most of which lead to the public hospital system.  They include mental health issues, whether acute, chronic or acute-on-chronic, illicit drug use, perhaps loading up on mental health issues, increased passive tolerance of greater violence in and by the now metropolises (as opposed to tight-knit communities), and a general lack of respect for those providing any type of community service.  Emergency service providers and our colleagues and other healthcare workers in emergency departments face the brunt, but it is throughout the public hospital system.  I note that our population is growing remarkably, we have generated profound productivity improvements, but there remains a yawning gap of lack of public hospital capacity investment to match the essential hospital requirements of the complex, multi-system, elderly and/or obese, chronic illness sufferers.  It is readily observable how “house full” messages contribute to patient frustration, then anger and venting in our workplace.  It was equally offensive to see lauding of “this is what 182 blows to the head looks like” related to a recent violent “sport” designed to inflict brain injury.  It is easy to see some might link these ingredients, resulting in an unsafe workplace for us. 

In perhaps a curious coincidence, I am now chairing an Australian Standards committee revising the standard Security for Health Care Facilities.  It will be a template for consideration of security risks for any and all health care facilities in Australia.  Its origin related to large public hospitals, but changes in technology and hospital interventions means security issues are everywhere that medicine is practised, including hospital-in-the-home and all points travelling between, patient record security, medication and medical gas security, microorganism security, IT security, food security, let alone staff safety and security.  I will be pleased to receive your thoughts on this topic.  Obviously not everything will be totally relevant to all, but in these days of terrorism and bioterrorism, it will be a useful tool for risk analysis.  It will be a sad day if every part time medical point of care in a high rise tower through to our major teaching hospitals needs to have the same security we now take for granted on getting to the airside of an airport, surveillance cameras or requires trained and authorised security personnel with Tasers and policing powers comparable to Protective Service Officers. 

Of note, none of the above may have prevented Patrick’s injury, or some of them may have caused the alleged perpetrator to pause. 

Public Hospital Funding

It is clear an expansion and greater funding of public hospital’s is required to meet the increasing demand, separate to security investments.  This is about to accelerate in my view as more reduce private health insurance due to increasing premiums coupled with increasing mortgage, energy and education costs pressures.  An important discussion will be how best to use the now billions of tax dollars shoring up publically listed health insurance companies’ profits and employee bonus payments, whilst squeezing the marketplace and offering frequently inadequate products to bamboozled patients seeking a tax break. 

Recently the Government rejected a proposal to abolish the private health insurance rebate and effectively take funds it saves from that, along with hospital funding, to provide a standard benefit for services, regardless if they happen in a public or in a private hospital. This would effectively take Commonwealth funds from public hospitals and force patients to pay more for coverage. This would reduce the amount the Commonwealth contributes to the cost of public hospitals to a paltry 35 per cent.  The 42 or 43 per cent funding we’re getting from the Commonwealth now is not sustainable for future public hospital operation. 

A 35 per cent share would be a disaster in the super-stretched public system and in the private system for that matter.  In recent years we’ve seen the Commonwealth's share of funding to public hospitals drop below 45 per cent with a formula that only relies on growth in CPI and population. The AMA’s Public Hospital Report Card shows that performance in the system, such as wait times in the emergency department or for elective surgery, are not improving, or indeed are going backwards. So we can be thankful that this reduction has been ruled out.

But with consideration of the way hospitals are funded, we need to focus on priorities and things that might work in the hospital system. This especially includes quality and safety initiatives as well as increasing the utility of secondary hospitals or in the community. We must put more resources into primary care prevention as a long-term strategy for reducing the rate of increase of pressure on public hospitals.

Let’s hope governments see sense and realise that proper health care is a sound investment and saves money in the long term, and that engaging with doctors is the only way to develop sound health policy.  I look forward to discussing these and other issues with you in upcoming CPHD meetings and other events.  

Published: 16 Aug 2017