| |
ASD Explanation of Terms
|
|
Full Time Equivalent
(FTE) |
FTE is a modified count of doctors that takes into account the partial contribution of doctors who work less than full-time. FTE is calculated by dividing each doctor's Medicare billing by the average billing of full-time doctors for the year, with the FTE figure for each doctor capped at one. That is, a doctor with 50% of the average billing for full-time doctors is counted as 0.5, while doctors billing at or above the average are counted as one.
Source: http://www.health.gov.au/ |
Full Time Workload Equivalent
(FWE) |
FWE is a measure of medical workforce supply that takes into account the differing working patterns of doctors. FWE is calculated by dividing each doctor's Medicare billing by the average billing of full-time doctors for the year. There is no cap on a doctor's FWE. That is, a doctor with 50% of the average billing for full-time doctors is counted as 0.5, a doctor billing at the average is counted as one, and a doctor billing at 150% of the average is counted as 1.5.
Source: http://www.health.gov.au/
|
| HealthWIZ |
In 1991, HealthWIZ was developed by the Australian Government of Health and Ageing as a means of providing population health and health services data. The data contained in HealthWIZ is collated from a range of sources including the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA), Medicare Australia, State Health Departments and the Registrars of Births, Deaths and Marriages. For the first time, in 1999, HealthWIZ was published as a non-commercial product, and was made available to eligible Australian health agencies and organisations at a nominal cost. HealthWIZ is easy to use, allows aggregate data to be drilled down in a number of ways, and presents results in maps and tables.
Reference: http://www.health.gov.au/ |
| Population statistics |
In providing population figures for Divisions, we are aware that there may be minor differences between our figures and those provided by other sources. These discrepancies result from the need to calculate Divisional boundaries using the Australian Bureau of Statistics Collection Districts, Postal Areas and Statistical Local Areas (which were not designed for this purpose). In order to arrive at the best concordance, we have consulted with the Public Health Information Development Unit (PHIDU) of the University of Adelaide, who have been contracted to provide the Population Health Profiles for Divisions.
|
| Rural Remote Metro Area (RRMA) |
The Rural Remote Metropolitan Area (RRMA) classification system was developed in 1994 (Australian Government Department of Health & Ageing, 2005; Australian Institute of Health & Welfare, 2004). RRMA classifies Statistical Local Area (SLA) according to population and locality into three zones: Metropolitan, Rural or Remote. These zones are further divided into seven classes:
- Capital cities (RRMA category 1)
- Other metropolitan centres (2)
- Large rural centres (3)
- Small rural centres (4)
- Other rural centres (5)
- Remote centres (6)
- Other remote areas (7)
The ASD uses the RRMA classification system in order to allocate Divisions according to rurality. However, as a number of SLAs contribute to each Division, it was necessary to develop further criteria to allocate Divisions to the RRMA categories. Divisions are classified as eligible for More Allied Health Service (MAHS) funding if 5% or more of their total population is located within the RRMA categories 4 to 7. Allocation to the five RRMA categories used in the ASD takes this into account. The following categories are used:
- Metro (>95% of population in RRMA 1,2)
- Metro/Rural (<95% of population in RRMA 1,2 & <95% in RRMA 3,4,5)
- Rural (>95% of population in RRMA 3,4,5)
- Rural/Remote (<95% of population in RRMA 3,4,5 & < 95% in RRMA 6,7)
- Remote (>95% of population RRMA 6,7)
It is important to consider that this classification may be problematic as some Divisions categorised as rural may have large urban populations. It is of note that the RRMA classification system has not been updated since its initial development, with classifications reflecting the populations from the 1991 Census. The use of the RRMA classification system is currently under review (Australian Government Department of Health & Ageing, 2005).
References:
Australian Government Department of Health & Ageing. (2005). Review of the Rural, Remote, and Metropolitan Areas (RRMA) Classification. Discussion Paper (Without Prejudice). Canberra: AGDHA
Australian Institute of Health & Welfare. (2004). Rural, regional and remote health: A guide to remoteness classifications (AIHW cat no: PHE 53). Canberra: AIHW. |
|
|
|
|
|
print version
email this page
