Volume 191 - Issue 8
Coordination of care for patients with chronic disease
Authors: Mark F Harris, Bibiana C Chan and Sarah M Dennis
Med J Aust 2009; 191 (8): 471-472. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02897.x
Published online: 19 October 2009
Published online: 19 October 2009
In reply: We accept the clarification by Hartigan and colleagues of their article’s intent,1 and agree with the importance of good-quality information in electronic databases, especially if the information is to be exchanged.
Unlike Hartigan et al, we do believe that Team Care Arrangements (TCAs) have some merit, as they provide structure for planned care and help coordinate access to multidisciplinary care provided over a period of time within the complexity of the current health system. However, they have not been very effective in developing trusting relationships and encouraging better communication between general practitioners and providers outside the practice because of a variety of systemic barriers. In our editorial, we suggested some alternative strategies.2
Although the paperwork and complexity of current requirements could be reduced, we cannot see that coercion is involved. Both patients and providers can choose to enter freely into TCAs and the requirements are for communication and consent, not for “right of veto over action”.
References
- Hartigan PA, Soo TM, Kljakovic M. Do Team Care Arrangements address the real issues in the management of chronic disease? Med J Aust 2009; 191: 99-100. 0_CDACEADC
- Harris MF, Chan BC, Dennis SM. Coordination of care for patients with chronic disease [editorial]. Med J Aust 2009; 191: 85-86. 0_i1091842