Should more Australian doctors be salaried than paid by fee-for-service?

Matthew H R Anstey and Stephen P Gildfind
Med J Aust 2012; 196 (2): . || doi: 10.5694/mja11.11446
Published online: 6 February 2012

To the Editor: In his Opposing Views article, Travis claims that fee- for-service (FFS) “provides the best transparency, accountability and incentive for everyone”.1 However, FFS models reward volume and intensity, rather than quality of outcomes. Evidence suggests that FFS results in increased numbers of patient visits, investigations and procedures,2 which contribute to inflation in the cost of health care.3

  • Matthew H R Anstey1
  • Stephen P Gildfind2

  • 1 Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass, USA.
  • 2 The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC.


Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.