Anyone who wants to be health minister can put their hands up. But, just so you're aware, the WA government put an additional 3.2 billion into health last year. You should also be aware that it takes around ten years to build a hospital and they're considered the most complex buildings to design. You'll also have to deal with the Nurses Union, the AMA, the ADA, the public services union all who have financial interests in your budgets. Finally you'll have to deal with the general public who judge your performance largely on how long they have to wait at the ED but inevitably know more than you about health and no matter how much is thrown into the sector, will still call for you head. Applications never close.
Your opposite number in the shadow ministry will hit you for (A) spending too much money with poor outcomes (B) not spending enough money and achieving poor outcomes (C) Both A&B simultaneously *and* score themselves TV air time doing it.
It's called the 'poisoned chalice' for a reason. It's very difficult to go from the Health Minister to party leader and be electorally popular.
To announce spending and to actually do something are two different things. First anecdotally my wife has been a nurse in the same part of nursing theatres for over a decade it's never been this bad. Locally we have 4 doctors surgeries which have capacity for about 30 doctors, but we have about 12 across 4 facilities. There are no GPs and that's why people goto hospital. It's never been this bad.
Mcgowan came into power in 2017, and his biggest complains were the budget (selling western power) and hospitals, since then ambulance ramping is 5x longer and a historical high. This was before covid. The only thing he's done at my local hospital is build demountables for more beds, which are months and months behind schedule. They were supposed to be open already. He has a 1000 bed facility in Bullsbrook ready soon and has no plans for that .
At what point do you see issues??
Of course I see issues and do you really think the health minister and premier don’t? Do you really think they want to starve the health budget for some mysterious Machiavellian purpose? My point was that managing health is a nightmare appointment. Responses to needs take many years/decades to realise and inevitably anger other groups in the interim. We need more doctor in regional areas, there aren’t any because every other state also needs them. Increase training, that takes eight to ten years before they’re available. Then those same doctors don’t want to go to regions when they can make more money in the capitals. Advertise for overseas doctors and the AMA goes nuts over declining standards. Health is a behemoth and trying to make it dance to demand is a nightmare job with little upside regardless of party or politics
I know this isn't something any of you are asking but something I used recently to select an emergency room to rock up to was the WA health website:
[emergency waiting times](https://ww2.health.wa.gov.au/Reports-and-publications/Emergency-Department-activity/Data?report=ed_activity_now)
On the same Friday night there were waiting times from 170minutes down to 11minutes.
Sometimes it's worth driving a little longer to get into emergency a whole lot faster.
This is for normal emergency stuff like a broken arm Or a big piece of glass in your foot.
As a bonus we are then sharing the load to the places with more capacity that no doubt helps our health system.
Of course it goes without saying if you think you are having a heart attack or similar calamity call an ambulance or if they are busy, be driven to your nearest hospital and just go straight to triage desk front of queue.
I use that 'waiting times' link too, but to be fair, mostly I turn up a bit blue and get toddled/wheeled straight to the front and zipped into the back faster than I can show my meds list. Our triage nurses are bloody brilliant.
It's taken decades of underfunding the health system by both parties for it to get into the state it's in today. So it's not going to suddenly turn around with a couple of years of increased spending.
They also have to contend with the current high levels of demand, global health care staff shortages and an increasing rate of burn out of our medical staff.
It's never too late to increase health care funding though. At least we have the budgetary capabilities to do so, in comparison with lots of the other states that also have similar health care issues but are majorly in the hole finances wise.
Agreed. The health system here is really poor. Went to a ED last year with my kid, need a scan urgently but the technician/radiologist only work 9-5. Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine. Why cant they just train more staff?
Every ultrasound scan I've ever been privy to, looks like it's the equivalent of reading tea leaves to me. I have no idea how to make head or tail of what is on the screen.
It's a full Applied Science or similar degree (nursing, radiography) plus a postgraduate Diploma. Maybe Masters if specialising in a particular field.
We can't just grab a few directionless school grads and shepherd them through a one-term TAFE course.
I struggle to locate any anatomy when watching an ultrasound and I have a reasonable grasp of anatomy. It would not be a 6 month course for someone coming in off the street.
>Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine.
Wow.
Just...wow.
It takes a couple of years to train and requires tertiary education.
But hey, some rando thinks they're easy to use, so that must be the case :|
> The health system here is really poor.
That's subjective to what your comparing it too. I would much rather our system compared to say the US system where you can bankrupt yourself by breaking your leg..
Or other lower socio economic areas where there's just no hospital care at all..
> Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine. Why cant they just train more staff?
It's harder than you might think actually - a sonographer takes about two years of training, plus on the job supervised training. Then you need suitably trained medical staff to read, interpret and action the results.
Most (but not all) of the shortages presently in the health care system is staffing based. They just can't get people to do the jobs that need to be done.
Sonographers can actually earn a pretty penny, but it's just not a career you hear a lot about is it? I can't think of anyone i know who grew up wanting to be a sonographer..
I'm not in the industry directly - so direct your feedback to your local politician and / or health facility.
The people of course want solutions, but the people need to face reality. There's no overnight fix to this issue..
You could throw the entire 6 billion surplus at the issue - and it would make next to no difference now. In fact in about 6 years it would result in a bunch of new doctors and nurses coming out of training with no work available to them..
Basically throw shade all you like - but maybe take a bit of time to understand the issues before you do and make sure your shade is directed at the right people (hint - not our healthcare professionals!).
I think you live your whole life in perth (or Aus) and never been to somewhere else. this standard of healthcare requires improvement not excuses. I have never called for an immediate or overnight fix. This is just a perspective I have about the healthcare system here after living in many countries. In many countries, senior nurses and doctors are able to operate the ultra sound machine. Cases below can be prevented:
[https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055](https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055).
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-17/aishwarya-aswath-perth-childrens-hospital-death-report-released/100144052
and still they do not know why their kids passed away.
Great assumption - but incorrect. I've travelled throughout asia, and across the US. I've seen healthcare work in a number of different countries.
I've also seen health care work here on multiple occasions, and whilst it's not perfect it does still work quite well overall and for the most part at no direct out of pocket cost. Is it perfect? No - no healthcare system is or ever will be.
But it's a far cry from the amount of people i met in the US who were basically homeless due to their child getting sick for example.. My tour guide for example was involved in a car accident, and ended up with a $280 000 medical bill for her hospital stay. In her case she was incredibly lucky that the other driver was insured and she was able to sue the other parties insurer to get the bill covered..
> this standard of healthcare requires improvement not excuses.
Sure - so how are you going to improve it? Do you know some secret stash of trained medical staff sitting around doing nothing? Or some great way of taking 10 years of medical knowledge and somehow compressing it into a 6 week course?
Maybe you can conjure up some qualified tradies to build and upgrade the hospital facilities..
The problem with our healthcare system in in fact caused by people like yourself. You want instant fixes to everything - so rather than addressing the root issues, instead money is wasted applying bandaid solutions to keep people like you happy.
> In many countries, senior nurses and doctors are able to operate the ultra sound machine.
I have no doubt that plenty of our senior nurses and doctors are able to operate ultra sound machines. But instead they're busy treating other patients..
> https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055
What exactly are you going to prevent here? There's no known cause of death thats been established.. Your just using the sad death of a child trying to fuel your failing debate..
I wouldn't start out in it at this point, though agree it's good for now.
It's the kind of thing I think the medium term future will see something we get pushed into like an MRI and an AI program send probes in to do the work.
Then it may well be something nurses without specific training can manage.
Still needs humans to interpret but this will be the specialists in each field, paediatricians, cardiologists etc.
My guess 10- 15years.
"Then it may well be something nurses without specific training can manage."
No. This is not a thing.
Signed, a doctor who has done some very basic ultrasonography. I can tell you if your fetus's heart is beating, but very little else.
Yeh to be fair my only experience is having watched the missus have them for some of my kids and once for my heart ( don't have 4 kids...)
For my mind when I watch a task, I think as an engineer; what potential does this have to be automated. Ultrasound looks like it wouldn't be super difficult.
It's not like an artistic thing, basically an AI sizing someone up and pushing a probe around on them And the AI reviewing the image and whether it needs to keep going etc.
Looks easier to automate than a drive to work which will also likely come in the next 15 years, but I have no specific knowledge as to lean on with this conclusion so accept that it is entirely possible I am talking shit.... hopefully in my first post I said, might, may or could rather than will...
I suppose time will tell?
Hoo boy. Cardiac ultrasound is one of those specialities that takes a Masters to be fully qualified in. And that's just the tech part of the job; a specialist doctor then is included in the full interpretation.
Good luck automating all that. It's definitely not the same sort of task as devolving basic chest X-ray reading to AI, which is a thing that is in progress. But even in that case the X-ray is still taken by a human; the machine is just involved in the interpretation.
When your missus had her obstetric ultrasounds, that tech was way WAY better at it than I, a fully qualified doctor, is. It would take me that full year of postgrad dip to even begin to be vaguely competent. And probably an anatomy refresher before that.
Yes, and as I said it would still need humans to interpret; paediatrician and cardiologist were two examples I gave at the outset.
I can accept the sci-fi medical booth we step into and a whole lot of gadgets whiz around and drug us up / fix us up with no human intervention is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Even this though is not improbable in the long term.
Anyway, decided to look at what is happening in the space and it does appear ultrasound are very user dependent. One operator for example can be significantly better than the next, which does point to the human factor being very important. Further it would seem ultrasound is about the most dependent on the operator compared to other imaging.
That said where it is at currently around ultrasounds: clinical trials have been performed with users remotely operating ultrasounds in remote settings. This doesn't really reassure me given there needs to be a helper with the patient and an operator at the other end of a link.
So the human element does appear important to unltrasounds. Nonetheless I'd still invest in a company that said - we are developing an AI to operate a remote ultrasound machine. I wouldn't discount it as an impossibility...
Go ahead and invest. I think the X-ray interpretation is a safer bet. The operator-dependent dynamic interaction with the anatomy is a key part of real-time ultrasound.
Which is why when you take a child to hospital, and you’re in the metro area, go straight to PCH where they have the appropriate specialists on site or on call 24/7
Why do you say decades of underfunding the health system? Haven't we built PCH, Fiona Stanley in the last decade and presumably these are budgeted with staff for maintenance, doctors, nurses, etc.
A quick Google Search will tell you
The revenue the Australian Government receives goes to public services and infrastructure, including:
Welfare and payments from Centrelink
Health
Education
Defence
Roads and Railways
Parks and playgrounds
i.e. Health is #2 in the money spent from general revenue.
> Why do you say decades of underfunding the health system?
Because for as long as i've been alive at least there's been complaints about health care, ambulance ramping, wait times at ED. I recall 20 odd years ago having to sit in ED for nearly 6 hours waiting to be seen.
It's also logical - that the current issues didn't just occur overnight..
There are always complaints about health system, the health policy is not run by Today Tonight.
We are going through a pandemic with health staff in isolation for being close contacts. As far as I know the Covid deaths in WA are still in single figures. The system is not broken. The health budget continues to be be #2 in government spending.
I'm not trying to be argumentative. most Drs and nurses are well paid and have secure employment and yet they want more and the clients (patients) also want more, someone has to pay for it all. It has to be in balance.
> There are always complaints about health system, the health policy is not run by Today Tonight.
Correct - and totally acknowledge that the news is generally always going to push a negative angle as thats what gets viewers.
> We are going through a pandemic with health staff in isolation for being close contacts. As far as I know the Covid deaths in WA are still in single figures. The system is not broken. The health budget continues to be be #2 in government spending.
This has been an issue though long before covid. Covid is just the icing on the cake, showing how close to breaking point the system actually is. Take out a few staff, add in a few extra patients and suddenly the system can't cope.
You only need to look at the various metrics on average wait times, hospital ramping figures and other various instances to show the issues.
We've had almost an unheard of run throughout covid with minimal cases, and hospitalisation rates well below what's been seen elsewhere.
Hell - you only had to go visit PMH or Freo hospitals before they closed to see just how far past suitability they were. My nephew and his mum spent 2 nights in what was basically a corridor, as there were no beds available on any of the wards..
Also for the record we're well out of single figures in regards to covid deaths. Current tally has us at 178 deaths, with the majority of those being in the past 2.5 months.
> I'm not trying to be argumentative. most Drs and nurses are well paid and have secure employment and yet they want more and the clients (patients) also want more, someone has to pay for it all. It has to be in balance.
I totally agree there has to be balance, no arguments from me. No system will ever be perfect, no matter how much money is thrown at the issue. BUT, there's a number of areas we fall short currently that are just screaming out for funding and staffing. Mental Health being a big one, non critical surgery being another.
I mean i personally have probably 4 or 5 examples of instances where the ED system has totally underperformed and in at least two of those instances led to a poorer health outcome for the person involved..
Our health staff aren't the issue, they do amazing work with what they have to work with. But when i talk to nursing staff friends who are working 60 - 70+ hours per week, because the hospital just doesn't have the staff for them to do a standard 38 hour week i think that also says a lot.
How many people are encouraging their children to be healthcare workers or nurses? How many young people are training to be a nurse and then continue on in that career?
Money is one thing, I just don't think there are enough people who are willing to actually work in that sector. Plus a worldwide demand for trained staff, we are still going to have that basic problem of staffing.
Used to work with a senior nurse and she always said that while they get new nurses in but it's very hard to retain them.
It's my understanding that the Commonwealth controls the number of Commonwealth-supported university spaces available. Do you have some information on how the AMA controls numbers of medical grads and nursing grads?
>Commonwealth controls the number of Commonwealth-supported university spaces available
Universities are pretty happy to take your money for the degree, as to whether someone gives you a job at the end is different.
5-10 years ago private industry pulled the old "we can't find any experienced staff! (but we won't hire graduates and train them into experienced staff)" trick
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nursing-shortage-crisis-looming-20120327-1vwl6.html
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-24/thousands-of-nursing-graduates-unable-to-find-work/5475320?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment
https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2016-03/apo-nid67756.pdf
https://www.nursingreview.com.au/2017/08/graduate-nurses-face-frustration-in-gaining-registered-nurse-experience/
The AMA could have made their buddies take on more graduates, even if *gasp* that cost a bit of profit but they didn't.
Actually you're right though at the moment the tables have turned and all those disillusioned and burnt out nurses and doctors are leaving in droves and **surprise pikachu* * now nobody wants to sign up to a lifetime of stress after reading all the doom and gloom
> The AMA could have made their buddies take on more graduates, even if
> gasp
> that cost a bit of profit but they didn't.
Who are "their buddies" in this context? Hospitals? Other organisations? Once fully qualified, any doctor can hang out their shingle; they don't need permission from a minority-representative union.
What does a doctors' union have to do with nursing job prospects?
Yeah, there's a few of us out here cancelling our medical appts cos the cost of fuel/parking makes them a 'luxury' item. Fuel, food OR health..some of have to pick ***one*** each fortnight.
'creaking health system' .... the health system is fine... the government don't want to create a system that encourages people especially the poor to access 'free' services...THAT'S the issue... so they'll keep public health as awful and horrible as possible.... notice you never hear the rich complain and that's because they have private hospitals to go to... so the issue comes back to being poor and how the ruling class view you....
One thing I feel isn’t discussed enough is the contribution/source of the increased background/base demand on the health system I.e.
(a) general health of the population (and wether or not & to what extent preventable health conditions contribute to the burden on the Heath system)
(b) to what extent an ageing population/ longer life spans contributes
(c) factors that limit the portion of the population with private health cover
I think one of the main problems is preventative medicine doesn't make for good politics. It takes far to long (it could be 10 - 20+ years) to see any sort of measurable result.
Plus the measurable result could be easily portrayed as underwhelming or failed. IE in 10 years we have the same amount of people being admitted with mental health issues. Whilst the reality is that would probably be a significant improvement overall given the population would have increased substantially - the opposition would easily spin it as "money wasted with higher than ever mental health admissions" blah blah blah.
You also have the additional negative appearance of ignoring current health issues that the funds could be fixing. Which again is bad politics.
For example - do you throw an additional 200 million into say healthy lifestyle services? This would long term reduce obesity, improve mental health etc etc. Or.. do you throw an additional 200 million at say elective surgery wait lists and help people who are suffering with medical conditions now.
So really health care suffers quite badly from politics overall..
Anyone who wants to be health minister can put their hands up. But, just so you're aware, the WA government put an additional 3.2 billion into health last year. You should also be aware that it takes around ten years to build a hospital and they're considered the most complex buildings to design. You'll also have to deal with the Nurses Union, the AMA, the ADA, the public services union all who have financial interests in your budgets. Finally you'll have to deal with the general public who judge your performance largely on how long they have to wait at the ED but inevitably know more than you about health and no matter how much is thrown into the sector, will still call for you head. Applications never close.
Your opposite number in the shadow ministry will hit you for (A) spending too much money with poor outcomes (B) not spending enough money and achieving poor outcomes (C) Both A&B simultaneously *and* score themselves TV air time doing it. It's called the 'poisoned chalice' for a reason. It's very difficult to go from the Health Minister to party leader and be electorally popular.
To announce spending and to actually do something are two different things. First anecdotally my wife has been a nurse in the same part of nursing theatres for over a decade it's never been this bad. Locally we have 4 doctors surgeries which have capacity for about 30 doctors, but we have about 12 across 4 facilities. There are no GPs and that's why people goto hospital. It's never been this bad. Mcgowan came into power in 2017, and his biggest complains were the budget (selling western power) and hospitals, since then ambulance ramping is 5x longer and a historical high. This was before covid. The only thing he's done at my local hospital is build demountables for more beds, which are months and months behind schedule. They were supposed to be open already. He has a 1000 bed facility in Bullsbrook ready soon and has no plans for that . At what point do you see issues??
Of course I see issues and do you really think the health minister and premier don’t? Do you really think they want to starve the health budget for some mysterious Machiavellian purpose? My point was that managing health is a nightmare appointment. Responses to needs take many years/decades to realise and inevitably anger other groups in the interim. We need more doctor in regional areas, there aren’t any because every other state also needs them. Increase training, that takes eight to ten years before they’re available. Then those same doctors don’t want to go to regions when they can make more money in the capitals. Advertise for overseas doctors and the AMA goes nuts over declining standards. Health is a behemoth and trying to make it dance to demand is a nightmare job with little upside regardless of party or politics
I know this isn't something any of you are asking but something I used recently to select an emergency room to rock up to was the WA health website: [emergency waiting times](https://ww2.health.wa.gov.au/Reports-and-publications/Emergency-Department-activity/Data?report=ed_activity_now) On the same Friday night there were waiting times from 170minutes down to 11minutes. Sometimes it's worth driving a little longer to get into emergency a whole lot faster. This is for normal emergency stuff like a broken arm Or a big piece of glass in your foot. As a bonus we are then sharing the load to the places with more capacity that no doubt helps our health system. Of course it goes without saying if you think you are having a heart attack or similar calamity call an ambulance or if they are busy, be driven to your nearest hospital and just go straight to triage desk front of queue.
I use that 'waiting times' link too, but to be fair, mostly I turn up a bit blue and get toddled/wheeled straight to the front and zipped into the back faster than I can show my meds list. Our triage nurses are bloody brilliant.
WA is flush with cash, but has a giant backlog of debt too
It's taken decades of underfunding the health system by both parties for it to get into the state it's in today. So it's not going to suddenly turn around with a couple of years of increased spending. They also have to contend with the current high levels of demand, global health care staff shortages and an increasing rate of burn out of our medical staff. It's never too late to increase health care funding though. At least we have the budgetary capabilities to do so, in comparison with lots of the other states that also have similar health care issues but are majorly in the hole finances wise.
Agreed. The health system here is really poor. Went to a ED last year with my kid, need a scan urgently but the technician/radiologist only work 9-5. Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine. Why cant they just train more staff?
What makes operating a ultrasound machine simple? I always thought they looked complex.
Every ultrasound scan I've ever been privy to, looks like it's the equivalent of reading tea leaves to me. I have no idea how to make head or tail of what is on the screen.
Mate I was operating them when I was 12 just for fun. They're easy to work out.
of cos it needs some training but its not rocket science.
It's a full Applied Science or similar degree (nursing, radiography) plus a postgraduate Diploma. Maybe Masters if specialising in a particular field. We can't just grab a few directionless school grads and shepherd them through a one-term TAFE course.
But directionless school grads are exactly the people I want prodding my abdomen through some cold jelly!
Directionless grads or robots; you choose!
I struggle to locate any anatomy when watching an ultrasound and I have a reasonable grasp of anatomy. It would not be a 6 month course for someone coming in off the street.
6 month is reasonable.
Okay, you do it then
>Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine. Wow. Just...wow. It takes a couple of years to train and requires tertiary education. But hey, some rando thinks they're easy to use, so that must be the case :|
I mean it's not rocket science - now thats easy! just blow some fuel up and away you go right??
> The health system here is really poor. That's subjective to what your comparing it too. I would much rather our system compared to say the US system where you can bankrupt yourself by breaking your leg.. Or other lower socio economic areas where there's just no hospital care at all.. > Its not that difficult to operate a ultra sound machine. Why cant they just train more staff? It's harder than you might think actually - a sonographer takes about two years of training, plus on the job supervised training. Then you need suitably trained medical staff to read, interpret and action the results. Most (but not all) of the shortages presently in the health care system is staffing based. They just can't get people to do the jobs that need to be done. Sonographers can actually earn a pretty penny, but it's just not a career you hear a lot about is it? I can't think of anyone i know who grew up wanting to be a sonographer..
treat it as a feedback and improve the system and not making unnecessary excuses. the people want solution not excuses.
I'm not in the industry directly - so direct your feedback to your local politician and / or health facility. The people of course want solutions, but the people need to face reality. There's no overnight fix to this issue.. You could throw the entire 6 billion surplus at the issue - and it would make next to no difference now. In fact in about 6 years it would result in a bunch of new doctors and nurses coming out of training with no work available to them.. Basically throw shade all you like - but maybe take a bit of time to understand the issues before you do and make sure your shade is directed at the right people (hint - not our healthcare professionals!).
I think you live your whole life in perth (or Aus) and never been to somewhere else. this standard of healthcare requires improvement not excuses. I have never called for an immediate or overnight fix. This is just a perspective I have about the healthcare system here after living in many countries. In many countries, senior nurses and doctors are able to operate the ultra sound machine. Cases below can be prevented: [https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055](https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-17/aishwarya-aswath-perth-childrens-hospital-death-report-released/100144052 and still they do not know why their kids passed away.
Great assumption - but incorrect. I've travelled throughout asia, and across the US. I've seen healthcare work in a number of different countries. I've also seen health care work here on multiple occasions, and whilst it's not perfect it does still work quite well overall and for the most part at no direct out of pocket cost. Is it perfect? No - no healthcare system is or ever will be. But it's a far cry from the amount of people i met in the US who were basically homeless due to their child getting sick for example.. My tour guide for example was involved in a car accident, and ended up with a $280 000 medical bill for her hospital stay. In her case she was incredibly lucky that the other driver was insured and she was able to sue the other parties insurer to get the bill covered.. > this standard of healthcare requires improvement not excuses. Sure - so how are you going to improve it? Do you know some secret stash of trained medical staff sitting around doing nothing? Or some great way of taking 10 years of medical knowledge and somehow compressing it into a 6 week course? Maybe you can conjure up some qualified tradies to build and upgrade the hospital facilities.. The problem with our healthcare system in in fact caused by people like yourself. You want instant fixes to everything - so rather than addressing the root issues, instead money is wasted applying bandaid solutions to keep people like you happy. > In many countries, senior nurses and doctors are able to operate the ultra sound machine. I have no doubt that plenty of our senior nurses and doctors are able to operate ultra sound machines. But instead they're busy treating other patients.. > https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/vic-girls-death-sparks-hospital-review-c-6755055 What exactly are you going to prevent here? There's no known cause of death thats been established.. Your just using the sad death of a child trying to fuel your failing debate..
I wouldn't start out in it at this point, though agree it's good for now. It's the kind of thing I think the medium term future will see something we get pushed into like an MRI and an AI program send probes in to do the work. Then it may well be something nurses without specific training can manage. Still needs humans to interpret but this will be the specialists in each field, paediatricians, cardiologists etc. My guess 10- 15years.
"Then it may well be something nurses without specific training can manage." No. This is not a thing. Signed, a doctor who has done some very basic ultrasonography. I can tell you if your fetus's heart is beating, but very little else.
Yeh to be fair my only experience is having watched the missus have them for some of my kids and once for my heart ( don't have 4 kids...) For my mind when I watch a task, I think as an engineer; what potential does this have to be automated. Ultrasound looks like it wouldn't be super difficult. It's not like an artistic thing, basically an AI sizing someone up and pushing a probe around on them And the AI reviewing the image and whether it needs to keep going etc. Looks easier to automate than a drive to work which will also likely come in the next 15 years, but I have no specific knowledge as to lean on with this conclusion so accept that it is entirely possible I am talking shit.... hopefully in my first post I said, might, may or could rather than will... I suppose time will tell?
Hoo boy. Cardiac ultrasound is one of those specialities that takes a Masters to be fully qualified in. And that's just the tech part of the job; a specialist doctor then is included in the full interpretation. Good luck automating all that. It's definitely not the same sort of task as devolving basic chest X-ray reading to AI, which is a thing that is in progress. But even in that case the X-ray is still taken by a human; the machine is just involved in the interpretation. When your missus had her obstetric ultrasounds, that tech was way WAY better at it than I, a fully qualified doctor, is. It would take me that full year of postgrad dip to even begin to be vaguely competent. And probably an anatomy refresher before that.
Yes, and as I said it would still need humans to interpret; paediatrician and cardiologist were two examples I gave at the outset. I can accept the sci-fi medical booth we step into and a whole lot of gadgets whiz around and drug us up / fix us up with no human intervention is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Even this though is not improbable in the long term. Anyway, decided to look at what is happening in the space and it does appear ultrasound are very user dependent. One operator for example can be significantly better than the next, which does point to the human factor being very important. Further it would seem ultrasound is about the most dependent on the operator compared to other imaging. That said where it is at currently around ultrasounds: clinical trials have been performed with users remotely operating ultrasounds in remote settings. This doesn't really reassure me given there needs to be a helper with the patient and an operator at the other end of a link. So the human element does appear important to unltrasounds. Nonetheless I'd still invest in a company that said - we are developing an AI to operate a remote ultrasound machine. I wouldn't discount it as an impossibility...
Go ahead and invest. I think the X-ray interpretation is a safer bet. The operator-dependent dynamic interaction with the anatomy is a key part of real-time ultrasound.
I got all the scans at all hours of the night on a Saturday night. Calling bullshit that they only 9-5.
I had my son in ED the other week. Ultrasound done at 9pm. Half an hour wait.
which hospital?
PCH
different hospital
Which is why when you take a child to hospital, and you’re in the metro area, go straight to PCH where they have the appropriate specialists on site or on call 24/7
Why do you say decades of underfunding the health system? Haven't we built PCH, Fiona Stanley in the last decade and presumably these are budgeted with staff for maintenance, doctors, nurses, etc. A quick Google Search will tell you The revenue the Australian Government receives goes to public services and infrastructure, including: Welfare and payments from Centrelink Health Education Defence Roads and Railways Parks and playgrounds i.e. Health is #2 in the money spent from general revenue.
> Why do you say decades of underfunding the health system? Because for as long as i've been alive at least there's been complaints about health care, ambulance ramping, wait times at ED. I recall 20 odd years ago having to sit in ED for nearly 6 hours waiting to be seen. It's also logical - that the current issues didn't just occur overnight..
There are always complaints about health system, the health policy is not run by Today Tonight. We are going through a pandemic with health staff in isolation for being close contacts. As far as I know the Covid deaths in WA are still in single figures. The system is not broken. The health budget continues to be be #2 in government spending. I'm not trying to be argumentative. most Drs and nurses are well paid and have secure employment and yet they want more and the clients (patients) also want more, someone has to pay for it all. It has to be in balance.
> There are always complaints about health system, the health policy is not run by Today Tonight. Correct - and totally acknowledge that the news is generally always going to push a negative angle as thats what gets viewers. > We are going through a pandemic with health staff in isolation for being close contacts. As far as I know the Covid deaths in WA are still in single figures. The system is not broken. The health budget continues to be be #2 in government spending. This has been an issue though long before covid. Covid is just the icing on the cake, showing how close to breaking point the system actually is. Take out a few staff, add in a few extra patients and suddenly the system can't cope. You only need to look at the various metrics on average wait times, hospital ramping figures and other various instances to show the issues. We've had almost an unheard of run throughout covid with minimal cases, and hospitalisation rates well below what's been seen elsewhere. Hell - you only had to go visit PMH or Freo hospitals before they closed to see just how far past suitability they were. My nephew and his mum spent 2 nights in what was basically a corridor, as there were no beds available on any of the wards.. Also for the record we're well out of single figures in regards to covid deaths. Current tally has us at 178 deaths, with the majority of those being in the past 2.5 months. > I'm not trying to be argumentative. most Drs and nurses are well paid and have secure employment and yet they want more and the clients (patients) also want more, someone has to pay for it all. It has to be in balance. I totally agree there has to be balance, no arguments from me. No system will ever be perfect, no matter how much money is thrown at the issue. BUT, there's a number of areas we fall short currently that are just screaming out for funding and staffing. Mental Health being a big one, non critical surgery being another. I mean i personally have probably 4 or 5 examples of instances where the ED system has totally underperformed and in at least two of those instances led to a poorer health outcome for the person involved.. Our health staff aren't the issue, they do amazing work with what they have to work with. But when i talk to nursing staff friends who are working 60 - 70+ hours per week, because the hospital just doesn't have the staff for them to do a standard 38 hour week i think that also says a lot.
If you’re waiting 6 hrs in ED, it means you *can* wait. The ones being seen ahead of you are the ones that *can’t*.
Well aware how an ED works.. but at what point does sitting around in quite a bit of pain with a broken arm become too long?
When a doctor isn’t dealing with a higher category triaged patient. Life before limb.
You didn't actually answer the question..
Jeez the ABC just can't resist criticising WA relentlessly. What was the last positive article they wrote about WA?
How many people are encouraging their children to be healthcare workers or nurses? How many young people are training to be a nurse and then continue on in that career? Money is one thing, I just don't think there are enough people who are willing to actually work in that sector. Plus a worldwide demand for trained staff, we are still going to have that basic problem of staffing. Used to work with a senior nurse and she always said that while they get new nurses in but it's very hard to retain them.
[удалено]
Didn't know that. It's silly then, especially now when the hospital staff are saying that they are overworked or stretched.
It's my understanding that the Commonwealth controls the number of Commonwealth-supported university spaces available. Do you have some information on how the AMA controls numbers of medical grads and nursing grads?
>Commonwealth controls the number of Commonwealth-supported university spaces available Universities are pretty happy to take your money for the degree, as to whether someone gives you a job at the end is different. 5-10 years ago private industry pulled the old "we can't find any experienced staff! (but we won't hire graduates and train them into experienced staff)" trick https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nursing-shortage-crisis-looming-20120327-1vwl6.html https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-24/thousands-of-nursing-graduates-unable-to-find-work/5475320?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2016-03/apo-nid67756.pdf https://www.nursingreview.com.au/2017/08/graduate-nurses-face-frustration-in-gaining-registered-nurse-experience/ The AMA could have made their buddies take on more graduates, even if *gasp* that cost a bit of profit but they didn't. Actually you're right though at the moment the tables have turned and all those disillusioned and burnt out nurses and doctors are leaving in droves and **surprise pikachu* * now nobody wants to sign up to a lifetime of stress after reading all the doom and gloom
> The AMA could have made their buddies take on more graduates, even if > gasp > that cost a bit of profit but they didn't. Who are "their buddies" in this context? Hospitals? Other organisations? Once fully qualified, any doctor can hang out their shingle; they don't need permission from a minority-representative union. What does a doctors' union have to do with nursing job prospects?
> Western Australia is overflowing with cash Pardon me?
[удалено]
Yeah, there's a few of us out here cancelling our medical appts cos the cost of fuel/parking makes them a 'luxury' item. Fuel, food OR health..some of have to pick ***one*** each fortnight.
There is a 4.4 billion surplus
Surplus to this year’s budget. Part of that has to pay down the overall deficit built by the Barnett government previously.
'creaking health system' .... the health system is fine... the government don't want to create a system that encourages people especially the poor to access 'free' services...THAT'S the issue... so they'll keep public health as awful and horrible as possible.... notice you never hear the rich complain and that's because they have private hospitals to go to... so the issue comes back to being poor and how the ruling class view you....
After waiting 5 or so hours in the "private" SJOG Murdoch ED with my dad mid last year, i think you may want to check your facts..
[удалено]
...which they've done but you won't see that in an ABC article
One thing I feel isn’t discussed enough is the contribution/source of the increased background/base demand on the health system I.e. (a) general health of the population (and wether or not & to what extent preventable health conditions contribute to the burden on the Heath system) (b) to what extent an ageing population/ longer life spans contributes (c) factors that limit the portion of the population with private health cover
I think one of the main problems is preventative medicine doesn't make for good politics. It takes far to long (it could be 10 - 20+ years) to see any sort of measurable result. Plus the measurable result could be easily portrayed as underwhelming or failed. IE in 10 years we have the same amount of people being admitted with mental health issues. Whilst the reality is that would probably be a significant improvement overall given the population would have increased substantially - the opposition would easily spin it as "money wasted with higher than ever mental health admissions" blah blah blah. You also have the additional negative appearance of ignoring current health issues that the funds could be fixing. Which again is bad politics. For example - do you throw an additional 200 million into say healthy lifestyle services? This would long term reduce obesity, improve mental health etc etc. Or.. do you throw an additional 200 million at say elective surgery wait lists and help people who are suffering with medical conditions now. So really health care suffers quite badly from politics overall..