A submission from the AMA on the proposal for advanced paramedics to be given prescribing powers was scathing of the initiative.
A consultation on the Paramedicine Board’s proposal to regulate a new stream of paramedicine has received a submission from the AMA expressing its concerns with the initiative.
The AMA’s concerns with the proposed model centred around the potential for paramedic prescribers to impact patient health and communication.
Team-based care models where paramedics work in collaboration with general practice have been endorsed by the AMA, with it stating that the new proposal runs the risk of further fragmenting care.
According to the AMA, independent prescribing of scheduled medicines by paramedics risks medication mismanagement and diminishing clinical oversight.
The proposal, pitched back in April, was backed by health ministers as a potential solution to increasing collaborative care and alleviate workforce shortage issues.
“The proposed regulatory model aims to enable the safe expansion of scope and support health workforce flexibility and agility in the delivery of healthcare services, while continuing to assure public safety and public confidence in the delivery of these health services by paramedics,” the AHPRA consultation summary read.
“In Australia, the application of state and territory drugs and poisons regulation supports paramedic prescribing under supervision and via a structured prescribing arrangement.
“The authority for the use of scheduled medicines exists at the employer level, not the practitioner level, and varies across jurisdictions.”
The proposal was pushed as a way to boost medical accessibility in troubled areas, particularly in rural and remote regions.
“A report by the Australian Bureau of Statistics found 46% of people who saw a general practitioner for urgent medical care waited for 24 hours or more, and almost nine per cent of people delayed or did not see a general practitioner due to cost,” the proposal stated.
Related
Timing and accessibility were also brought up as a major reason for the pharmacist pilot program in Victoria that also drew criticism from general practice bodies.
This has been reflected in the AMA’s submission outlining almost identical issues with this proposal as seen with the pilot program criticism.
The potential for how the proposal could alleviate workforce shortages was addressed by the AMA’s submission which reiterated that it was “unacceptable”.
“The AMA maintains prescribing by non-medical health practitioners should only occur within a medically led and delegated team environment in the interests of patient safety and quality of care,” the AMA’s submission read.
“Attempting to address workforce issues by reallocating existing professions within the [National Registration and Accreditation Scheme] and introducing new qualifications and registration will not resolve the underlying causes of the current workforce issues.
“Any proposed changes to professional scopes of practice should be addressed solely on their intrinsic benefits and risks – not as part of misconceived attempts to address health workforce shortages.”
