Chronic Disease Dental Scheme figures revealed
At a Senate committee hearing on Medicare’s Chronic Disease Dental Scheme, a Liberal Senator told a Centrelink official that the Department was “bureaucracy driven, not patient driven”.
Sen Eric Abetz (Tasmania) said: “I think that is the big distinction here, which is a matter of concern. Can the officials tell us: as a result of a (treatment) plan not having been sent to the GP in a timely fashion, have there been any negligence suits against any dentist in Australia resulting from that? We all know the answer to that, don’t we? It is zero. It is nil. It is none. That is right, isn’t it?”
The comment came during the Community Affairs Legislation Committee hearing on 16 February. During the hearing, Centrelink officials gave details about the scheme and action being taken against dentists and doctors who had not complied with the scheme’s requirements:
• As at the end of last year, 11,713 dentists had claimed under the scheme for providing 3,316,000 services.
• There were 933 audits that were under consideration or active, of which 540 were under way and 89 completed.
• The average payment per patient is $1716 – the maximum that can be claimed is $4250.
• There had been more than 1000 'complaints' against 719 dentists and non-dental practitioners.
• 40 doctors have been audited with 88 now being reviewed.
• About 53 or 54 compliance officers, of which approximately 10 are senior, are conducting the audits.
• Of the closed audits, 26 cases were found to be compliant and 63 were not.
Of the 63 non-compliant cases:
• Only 12 had not provided services (it was not known whether Medicare had been billed and the patients were to be treated later); 17 were educated about the administrative requirements of the scheme and no action was taken to recover money.
• Action is being taken against the remaining 46 to recover $21.5 million.
• $257,000 has been recovered so far. In determining what action to take, Centrelink looks are a practitioner’s claiming behaviour, whether non-compliance is a small or large proportion of the overall practice, and whether the practitioner is willing to engage in compliance discussions.
Figures for debt recovery are:
Examining these figures, Sen Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (Liberal NSW) suggested that “it begs the question that this is really a revenue-raising exercise rather than that all of a sudden the dentists are doing something wrong”. She said that she would put on notice questions relating to the legal obligations of debt recovery.
Sen Eric Abetz (Tasmania) said: “I think that is the big distinction here, which is a matter of concern. Can the officials tell us: as a result of a (treatment) plan not having been sent to the GP in a timely fashion, have there been any negligence suits against any dentist in Australia resulting from that? We all know the answer to that, don’t we? It is zero. It is nil. It is none. That is right, isn’t it?”
The comment came during the Community Affairs Legislation Committee hearing on 16 February. During the hearing, Centrelink officials gave details about the scheme and action being taken against dentists and doctors who had not complied with the scheme’s requirements:
• As at the end of last year, 11,713 dentists had claimed under the scheme for providing 3,316,000 services.
• There were 933 audits that were under consideration or active, of which 540 were under way and 89 completed.
• The average payment per patient is $1716 – the maximum that can be claimed is $4250.
• There had been more than 1000 'complaints' against 719 dentists and non-dental practitioners.
• 40 doctors have been audited with 88 now being reviewed.
• About 53 or 54 compliance officers, of which approximately 10 are senior, are conducting the audits.
• Of the closed audits, 26 cases were found to be compliant and 63 were not.
Of the 63 non-compliant cases:
• Only 12 had not provided services (it was not known whether Medicare had been billed and the patients were to be treated later); 17 were educated about the administrative requirements of the scheme and no action was taken to recover money.
• Action is being taken against the remaining 46 to recover $21.5 million.
• $257,000 has been recovered so far. In determining what action to take, Centrelink looks are a practitioner’s claiming behaviour, whether non-compliance is a small or large proportion of the overall practice, and whether the practitioner is willing to engage in compliance discussions.
Figures for debt recovery are:
Examining these figures, Sen Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (Liberal NSW) suggested that “it begs the question that this is really a revenue-raising exercise rather than that all of a sudden the dentists are doing something wrong”. She said that she would put on notice questions relating to the legal obligations of debt recovery.
Home (Past 7 Days)