Skip to main content RSS Info Close Search
Feedback

Let aged care be health system’s ‘prevention’ army

Ray Glickman, Amana Living chief executive, asks why the federal government is too fragmented to do some simple sums that could significantly reduce health care costs.

<p>Ray Glickman, Amana Living chief executive, says only by eradicating the fragmentation between the health and aged care systems can we address the escalating health costs of an ageing population.</p>

Ray Glickman, Amana Living chief executive, says only by eradicating the fragmentation between the health and aged care systems can we address the escalating health costs of an ageing population.

Why aren’t we investing more to prevent admissions to the higher care and expenditure level?

It doesn’t take a mathematical genius, or even a shrewd policy maker, to see that prevention of hospitalisation ought to be a top priority for older people.

Not only would a greater investment in residential aged care and home care constitute good prevention strategy – ie in monitoring health, preventing falls etc – but the increasingly high care nature of care facilities also means that they are operating with a high level of clinical capability.

The aged care sector is therefore perfectly placed to be the health system’s prevention army. We have the expertise. We can keep older people out of hospital, but the government needs to make a contribution based on the real cost of care.

Amana Living has recently entered into the transition care business. This program, designed to help older people to achieve their highest level of independence after a stay in hospital, makes so much sense that it’s hard to believe it actually exists.

Even then, there are perverse arrangements that mean the Government invests more in accommodating someone temporarily to get them ‘right’ (about $300) than supporting them permanently to keep them ‘right’ ($200).

Unfortunately, we operate within an incredibly inefficient landscape of delivery of health and ageing-related services. Presently each tier of government looks after its own financial interest, but not that of government as a whole and therefore of taxpayers as a whole. The absurdly short electoral cycle also works strongly against the adoption of longer term preventative strategies.

Only by eradicating this fragmentation between the health and aged care systems can we hope to address the escalating health costs resulting from our ageing population.

The federal government needs to look at the bigger picture and do the sums. 

Comments

Read next

Subscribe to our Talking Aged Care newsletter to get our latest articles, delivered straight to your inbox
  1. A new study published in Alzheimer’s & Dementia:...
  2. Our furry friends are more than just pets. They are cherished...
  3. The Department of Health and Aged Care will address the...
  4. As one ages, it’s a good idea to keep as healthy and active...
  5. Lutheran Services has become one of the first Aged Care...
  6. What would you like to see from the new Aged Care Act in...

Recent articles

  1. Do you believe that some workers are more entitled to a raise...
  2. At 2pm AEDT, aged care staff will learn the Fair Work...
  3. Understanding more about the 60-day prescription update to the...
  4. Multiple options are available to organise your medications
  5. Looking to move into the modern age of communication and speak...
  6. The government currently funds 75 percent of residential aged...
  7. One aged care home in Queensland is helping its residents...
  8. ‘Concussion,’ a word often associated with sports...
  9. As Australia’s population ages, we expect the number of...
  10. If you’re an older Australian, how would you like brands...
  11. Researchers suggest there could be a link between...
  12. Have you tried out the ‘Dollars to Care’ tool yet?