Advertising


News

‘Not the solution’: RACGP signs joint statement against UCCs


Chelsea Heaney


19/11/2024 4:48:23 PM

In renewed protest, the National Council of Primary Care Doctors warned the centres could create ‘permanent fragmentation of care’.

A crowded clinic waiting room.
A new joint statement has urged governments to move away from UCCs, pointing to three key areas of alternative reform.

The National Council of Primary Care Doctors has taken a strong stance against the establishment of urgent care centres (UCCs) by state, territory and federal governments across Australia.
 
In a statement, co-signed by the RACGP, the Council said the push towards UCCs is ‘not the solution’ and is instead advocating for increased access to general practice, including after-hours periods.
 
It states UCCs are ‘often nothing more than an exercise in rebranding of existing services and have been identified by the mid-term review of the National Health Reform Agreement as a model that needs to be addressed’.
 
‘The UCC model is inconsistent with the delivery of comprehensive and integrated primary care models, and reports indicate that clinical handovers from UCCs back to a patient’s regular GP practice are of inconsistent quality, if provided at all,’ it reads.
 
RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins told newsGP the joint statement sends a strong message that the nation’s peak primary care bodies are in agreement about UCCs.
 
‘These UCCs cost taxpayers more, they dilute our workforce and for rural and regional Australians, this further increases the inequity as they don't have access to them,’ she said.
 
‘I understand that for governments, especially coming into elections, they like being able to have shiny new things and to cut ribbons.
 
‘But funding gets results and if they put this money back into general practice we will deliver.’
 
There are now 58 UCCs open across Australia, all of which provide bulk-billed healthcare and were designed to take pressure off the nation’s overflowing emergency departments (EDs).
 
In May this year, the Federal Government announced $227 million to create 29 additional UCCs – something that Dr Higgins said was highlighting the ‘wrong priorities’.
 
The RACGP has long raised concerns about the centres, saying they will fragment care, and only ‘help a handful of people in privileged areas’.
 
While the Council acknowledged that UCCs are being developed to manage growing numbers of hospital ED presentations, it said all governments need to work together to deliver additional investment into primary care.
 
‘The Council has significant concerns that UCCs are creating competition for an already stretched workforce supply of general practitioners and primary care registered nurses,’ the joint statement said.
 
‘With continued expansion it will also limit the ability of general practices to train the future medical workforce in the clinical skills often required for urgent care-type presentations, creating permanent fragmentation of care in the system.
 
‘The solution needs to address fundamental structural issues as opposed to the pursuit of short-term options that contribute to longer term issues in the system.’
 
In its proposed solutions, the Council urges for investment into general practice and rural generalist training, as well as reforms in funding for after-hours periods.
 
‘Appropriately invest in facilitating increased access for Australians to their own GP/general practice, particularly from 6.00 – 9.00 pm, when the majority of after-hours GP-type presentations occur,’ it states.
 
‘Reform the funding model for primary care to facilitate general practice-based multidisciplinary care that is integrated, comprehensive and coordinated.’
 
Log in below to join the conversation.


fragmentation of care scope of practice UCC urgent care centres urgent care clinics walk-in centres


newsGP weekly poll Within general practice, do you think there are barriers to providing flu vaccinations? If so, what are they?
 
35%
 
8%
 
12%
 
11%
 
3%
 
4%
 
24%
Related






newsGP weekly poll Within general practice, do you think there are barriers to providing flu vaccinations? If so, what are they?

Advertising

Advertising

 

Login to comment

Winston Smith   20/11/2024 10:14:53 AM

By releasing this appalling letter, the RACGP has confirmed it has become a self-licking ice cream cone. You have confined after-hours general practice to the dustbin of history. Well done.

PS I will continue to work at an UCC like my fellow GP’s, honing my practical and diagnostic skills, working for a good hourly rate and not the pittance that the greedy GP practice owners are offering (60% of billings for an after-hours job where I might see just one patient in two hours - no thanks).


Dr Maxwell Ian Sorby Adams   23/11/2024 10:20:29 PM

This article and its supporters are grossly mistaken about Urgent Care (UC). Consider the following in response:
- more trainees are inspired to choose GP when they see exciting opportunities such as UC;
- UC allows for the return of urgent, non-life threatening illnesses to their rightful domain of primary care with GPs, rather than ED.
- UC markedly reduces costs for these cases relative to ED, and makes it more accessible through local catchment areas.
- UC allows GPs to continue treating these conditions, by establishing local networks for the primary care management of urgent conditions, which are not possible in mainstream GP as it relies on advanced bookings with predictable timeframes, rather than potentially immediate and time consuming accidents and illnesses.
- UC strengthens primary care and the GP position in the community by being GP run.
- UC is a special interest area for GPs, and it can’t be done well by GPs unless being done with regularity.


Dr Guy Abell   30/01/2025 11:23:02 AM

I agree with the above comments and question the colleges position on urgent care centres given that the majority of doctors working in them are fellowed GPs with experience in acute/emergency medicine who feel that they are putting their unique skill mix to appropriate use. I for one question why I continue to pay for a college that doesn’t support me in practicing my chosen area of generalism but seems to have no issue with GPs working in skin, womens health, aesthetics, surgical assisting to name a few areas that are not core GP (and which I have no complaint about GPs choosing to work in). I think the beauty of General practice is that you can choose to focus your practice in any number of areas of interest.