Alternatives to for-profit corporatisation: The view from general practice

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Search OPUS


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Anderson, R
dc.contributor.author Haywood, P
dc.contributor.author Usherwood, T
dc.contributor.author Haas, M
dc.contributor.author Hall, J
dc.date.accessioned 2009-12-21T03:53:39Z
dc.date.issued 2005
dc.identifier.citation Australian Journal of Primary Health, 2005, 11 (2), pp. 78 - 86
dc.identifier.issn 1448-7527
dc.identifier.other C1 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10453/5897
dc.description.abstract The aim of this study was to assess the expressed preferences of general practitioners (GPs) for alternative organisational models to for-profit GP corporatisation. A review of the findings of six feasibility studies that examined alternative organisational models for general practice in Australia was undertaken. Five feasibility studies were conducted within nine Divisions of General Practice, and a feasibility study was conducted by a state-based organisation among all 15 of its member Divisions. Overall, the six projects demonstrated a strong resistance among most GPs to any alternative model that involved giving up autonomy over practice matters. Consequently, the most favoured alternative organisational model was the "service company"-the establishment of a third party to provide a range of practice support services. In general, there was implicit acceptance that the service company could recover the cost of support service provision by charging GPs on a fee-for-service basis, and also that the Division itself would be the most acceptable organisation to take on this role. However, in four Divisional areas GPs revealed very low motivation towards either working together or with the local Division as a service company. Although these feasibility studies were carried out using different methods, and in a small sample of mostly urban Divisions, they suggest that many GPs would support their Divisions-or some other Division-related third party-to become more active providers of a range of practice support services.
dc.language eng
dc.title Alternatives to for-profit corporatisation: The view from general practice
dc.type Journal Article
dc.parent Australian Journal of Primary Health
dc.journal.volume 2
dc.journal.volume 11
dc.journal.number 2 en_US
dc.publocation Melbourne, Australia en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 78 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 86 en_US
dc.cauo.name BUS.Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation en_US
dc.conference Verified OK en_US
dc.for 1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences
dc.personcode 020119
dc.personcode 020116
dc.personcode 101498
dc.percentage 100 en_US
dc.classification.name Other Medical and Health Sciences en_US
dc.classification.type FOR-08 en_US
dc.description.keywords general practice; corporatisation; preferences; divisions; business support en_US
dc.description.keywords general practice
dc.description.keywords corporatisation
dc.description.keywords preferences
dc.description.keywords divisions
dc.description.keywords business support
dc.description.keywords Business support
dc.description.keywords Corporatisation
dc.description.keywords Divisions
dc.description.keywords General practice
dc.description.keywords Preferences
pubs.embargo.period Not known
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Economics
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Strength - Health Economics and Research Evaluation
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Students
utslib.copyright.status Closed Access
utslib.copyright.date 2015-04-15 12:17:09.805752+10
utslib.collection.history Closed (ID: 3)


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record