-
-
Replying to @yodaberg
Makes sense if you're looking at overall cost of NAP services. These are often funded with a mix of Commonwealth (MBS), State (NWAU), and other sources (grants etc) so just using NWAU would underestimate the costs
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
But why is the data unreliable? Why aren’t they collecting reliable data? Though I could ask this question about so many areas of health!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @yodaberg
The thing is, they don't expound on what "unreliable" means. The data itself might be fine, but not sufficient to calculate a reliable estimate of a nationally-weighted unit that is applicable across states, for example
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Might be that IHPA doesn't consider the state data they get reliable enough to ensure an accurate NWAU figure. Might be another tug of war between feds and state...lots of potential problems that aren't really expounded on
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @yodaberg
Actually, after carefully reading through, I think the main issue is that NAP NWAU data were not adjusted for Indigenous status and remoteness until 2018-19. That would've lead to a reduction in the allocation of NWAU in places with lots of remote patients...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
...So instead the commission inferred the weighted NWAU using service events + inpatient and ED data (which are weighted and have been for some time). Now that the weighting as been agreed on for NAP NWAU, and is being applied, the commission can use this data instead
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
But, seems like NWAU with remoteness adjustment is quite a bit lower for remote areas than the inferred number. The main outcome here is NT and TAS losing ~60mil which is being given to VIC and NSW insteadpic.twitter.com/B79cxiw7Xc
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
This is attributed to the fact that remote areas do not provide as many of these NAP services, and since NWAU is based primarily on the number of services provided (NOT the staff/resource cost), seeing less patients means fewer NWAU allocatedpic.twitter.com/cL2eVNCChp
-
-
TBH, using the NAP NWAU data really seems to disadvantage the NT - they're losing $172 per person so that VIC and NSW can get $7 and $3 pp in return. Probably going to have a fairly big impact on NAP services in the NT!
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
