The 60-day scripts were to save time and money. So why are we still waiting for cheaper drugs?

The Labor Party has committed $ 690 million in four years reduce the maximum cost of drugs The program of pharmaceutical services (PBS) to USD 25. The coalition has He match the promisewhich is estimated to save the Australians $ 200 million a year.

But consumers could save even more if the existing policy met their potential.

In 2023, the Federal Government introduced a 60-day prescription. This meant that consumers could get twice as many tablets for a script, with a fewer number of travel to the pharmacist (and to a doctor to obtain a script).

The government announced that consumers save Up to USD 190 per one medicine and up to USD 46 per license card holder, compared to the costs of a 30-day scenario.

But after a tough fight to get this policy, it is does not fulfill his promise.

Politics tough

The collection of this change required political courage and government expenditure.

Data on political donations show that pharmaceutical interests constitute huge mass donations from the healthcare sector. The pharmaceutical guild, which represents pharmacy owners, has published the most. These donations are an attempt to influence the backstage. When this fails, the guild is not afraid to publicly attack the rule.

The federal government stared at the Histrionic Stary campaign against 60-day prescribing. The guild claimed that the pharmacies would be closed due to reduced dosing fees. It is too claimed The drugs are over and the children would overdose due to pills.

The government pushed politics, but directly compensated Village pharmacies with current payments worth $ 20 million year.

The government also presented negotiations on the eighth agreement of the Social Pharmacy, which determines how much the government pays pharmacists for issuing, drug management and other services. The contract was signed last year and added $ 3 billion in recent expenses.

Long waiting for longer scripts

After all this conflict and cost, Our analysis PBS data shows that downloading longer scripts was painfully ponderous.

About 300 drugs for chronic health conditions have been added to the qualifying list Three stages.

In the first stage of drugs, the 60-day option became available at the end of 2023. This included joint drugs, such as statins for high cholesterol, perindopril under high blood pressure and osteoporosis alendronate.

Over a year later, in November 2024, only 30% of eligible drugs from the first stage came from a 60-day scenario.

It has no expectations. The Department of Health and Care deepens anticipated 60-day download would reach 45% in 2023–24, 58% in 2024–25 and 63% in 2026–27 if it is fully implemented.

In all drugs eligible for 60-day regulations, including those added at the second and third stage, only 21% of drugs Published came from a 60-day scenario.

Even at these low rates, we estimate that politics saved consumers over $ 110 million. Higher download, closer to the rates expected by the department, would mean even more savings.

Millions of people are missing. In 2024 there are about 28 million 30-day scripts for statins, compared to about 5 million 60-day scripts. If half of these patients had a 60-day scenario, they would save an additional $ 27 million a year.

If half of all eligible drugs were spent on 60 days, we estimate that patients save an additional 310 million dollars a year. This is more than $ 200 million expected savings based on the promise of drugs of USD 25.

And although the government spends money on a drug policy in the amount of USD 25, saves money on 60-day scripts, paying pharmacists less dosing fees.

We estimate that the government has already saved $ 141 million on 60-day prescribing. It can save an additional 297 million dollars a year if the download increased to 50%.

So why not more GPS write longer scripts?

Despite the efforts of the pharmaceutical guild to undermine the reform, low download is more about doctors than pharmacists: a general doctor who writes the script determines his duration, not a pharmacist.

Risk for patients is not a problem. While the 60-day prescription will not be suitable for all patients, Experts chose qualifying drugs Because rewriting them for 60 days is usually appropriate and protected.

Although there are some differences at 60-day prescribing rates of different drugs, it is low around the world. This suggests that the problem is not that GPS is much more cautious with some drugs than with others.

The culprit is probably inertia. GP exercise software generates default prescriptions when the patient had a medicine before. Because most people still receive 30-day prescriptions, it will be default for most repetitive scripts. And many patients may not be aware that the recent 60-day option is available.

Time to get results

With the pressure of the living costs system and the healthcare system, it is never far from headers, the priority should be progress in the range of 60-day prescribing.

The benefits of patients and government budgets are obvious. However, the benefit of releasing time for busy clinicians should not be overlooked. Longer scripts mean less GP time to write them and less pharmacist to fill them.

When Australia is aging and unwell, the need for GP and pharmacists is needed, and in many parts of the country there are stern deficiencies of primary healthcare.

Every second of the family doctor time, which can be released for diagnosis, treatment and helping patients in dealing with their states, is valuable.

There is also good evidence, pharmacists can provide a profitable drug review, advice on chronic diseases and other services. The transition from retail to services is a great way to postpone the pressure on the healthcare system.

So what can you do?

Fortunately, there are several straightforward shortcuts for longer scripts.

GP software suppliers should make a 60-day prescription of failure to perform the obligation for appropriate medicines.

Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, a professional GPS body, should continue to encourage GPS to write longer scripts.

Basic health networks, regional bodies responsible for improving basic healthcare, should inform GPS how they compare themselves with peers, giving GPS with low 60-day prescribing rates.

Finally, the federal government and consumer groups should conduct campaigns to inform patients about their options.

Longer scripts are a triple win: savings on medicines for patients, budget savings for the government and more time for family doctors and pharmacists. Few reforms mark all these boxes, so it is critical that they achieve good rules for standard practice.