Do you agree with the changes to the PBS? 45



View Profile

With the Pharmacy Agreement finalised and the Budget handed down last month, changes to the pharmaceutical benefit scheme are pretty much locked into place.

But there are a few surprises in the mix, not least of all the limitation of blood-glucose testing strips for people with Type-2 diabetes.

The Australian reports around half a million Australians will lose unlimited access to the test-strips, but the change will only affect those who manage their condition with diet and are not insulin dependent. A one-off six-month supply will be issued under the PBS to those who qualify, and exceptions will be made at doctors’ discretion.

Diabetes Australia does not agree with the change and said that restricting access to subsidised test strips would represent a “fundamental change to the universal-access rights of Australians with diabetes and must take into account the likelihood of serious and far-reaching risks and adverse consequences”.

However the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners on its Choosing Wisely website lists routine self-monitoring of blood glucose in Type 2 patients who are on oral medication only as something clinicians and consumers should question: “There is no evidence that self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) affects patient satisfaction, general well-being or general health-related quality of life”.

Health Minister Sussan Ley said, “The ultimate decision about a patient’s individual needs to access these test strips will still remain with their GP and we’ve put sensible protections in place to deliver this necessary flexibility”.

The change is expected to save taxpayers $146.3 million over four years.

The Government has committed $60m investment to extend the PBS to cover Crizotinib, which is used to treat a rare, life-threatening form of lung cancer, costing patients more than $80,000 a treatment.

Crizotinib will be listed on the PBS from July 1 through a Managed Entry Scheme that will speed up access for patients with the highest need for treatment.

Ms Ley said, “In fact, $1 in every $6 out of the $10 billion taxpayers invest in the PBS every year is now spent on cancer treatments.

The most striking change to the PBS is the focus on generic medications over their brand-name counterparts, which the Government says will reduce the cost of many medications.


The changes to the PBS sound good in theory but we want to know how they will work in practice: will you be affected, and will it be a change for the better or for the worse? 



Starts at 60 Writers

The Starts at 60 writers team seek out interesting topics and write them especially for you.

  1. This is another one of those decisions that may not save money in the longer term. Test strips allow the person with type 2 to monitor and manage their own sugar levels. The alternative is more frequent HbA1c pathology tests ordered by GP’s at a greater cost to the health system.

  2. Generic tablets saves government money but I object to being forced to take tablets made in India. I say no to the generic brand and always check where they come from.

    3 REPLY
    • Always take generic, unless script says NO. I would prefer to PAY a bit more if I have to get other drugs on list

  3. Hope the savings to the Government are worth the administration costs of implementing changes.

  4. Stop winging about a few dollars, Hundreds of people will now be able to access EXPENSIVE drugs for life threatening deceases, instead of paying many ,many thousands .One the Cystic Fibrosis drug has been around for a few years, unaffordable unless your grandparents ,as many did, gave you the $30K each year . Maybe not exact amount, read it last year. Helping people , is everyones problem.

    3 REPLY
    • A typical liberal response, I realise it’s hard for a liberal to think, but, if we changed the tax avoidance rules and the large corporations contributed to the country they plunder, we could look after all people!

    • Typical Labor response , Difficult for Labor to think about anyone except THEMSELVES. They have an awful lot to keep now, over half the population, on full welfare or part welfare.

      1 REPLY
      • Hows that Dawn?
        They only think of themselves but they have half the population on welfare?
        So there are no LNP voters in that lot?
        The trouble with the LNP logic is that they insinuate that everyone getting government assistance thru welfare is a burden, & thus, needs to be taken into a paddock & shot, or at least go into the mountains & die.
        “Everybody-that-hasn’t-got-a-job-is-a-bludger” mentality

    • I do think, I think about people worse off, who need help more than most do. I bet if it was your family member that needed these Million dollar drugs to live ,you would agree.

  5. I get satisfaction from checking my blood sugars daily and am very careful if it goes over 7 . This is false economy as hospital admission costs will outweigh any savings .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *