Emeritus Professor Robin Creyke AO has been engaged to conduct the review. The AMA is making a submission to this review and is keen to hear from members about their views on the s92 process.
Members will be aware the PSR scheme was introduced in 1994 by the Federal Government to safeguard the public against risks and of costs of inappropriate practices of practitioners, as well as protecting the integrity of the Medical Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
AMA President Dr Omar Khorshid said members had raised concerns about “transparency of the process, a lack of information being provided with respect to their rights,” and feeling pressured to enter the agreements despite believing they had done nothing wrong.
“This review is a chance to independently examine these concerns and make recommendations for change if there is evidence doctors are not being afforded procedural fairness,” Dr Khorshid said.
Under section 92 of the Act, an agreement between a person under review and the Professional Services Review agency, would: (a) require the person under review to acknowledge they have engaged in inappropriate practice in connection with rendering or initiating specified services during the review period; and (b) include a ‘specified action’.
Commonly, a ‘specified action’ can include repayment of money relating to specific services, a period of partial or full disqualification from the MBS or PBS, and a reprimand from the PSR director.
If required, the Review may make recommendations to improve the experience for persons under review.
If you have feedback about the section 92 agreement process related to the review, please email AMA secretariat at firstname.lastname@example.org by CoB 2 December 2021.
Further information on the PSR and the Review: