Family doctors warn against one-sided focus on primary care centers

With a view to the planned expansion of the model, ÖGAM President Peter Kowatsch stated on Thursday that a sole focus on centers results in "in practice a clear disadvantage for the rural population." Especially in regions with low population density, large-scale centers reach their limits, while local practices and smaller networks could ensure care.

The ÖGAM also emphasized that PVEs are "no panacea for general practitioner care in Austria." Alongside primary care centers, single practices and group practices must also be strengthened, "for instance through new pool models," as the professional society noted. This is intended to prevent care from increasingly concentrating in urban locations.

In substance, the criticism is also directed at the resources of the different forms of care. To ensure "fair and comprehensive" primary care, the ÖGAM demands "equivalent access to non-medical professional groups," regardless of the chosen organizational form. Specifically, this concerns professional groups such as nursing, therapy, or social work, which to date have mainly been integrated into centers.

Demand for fair framework conditions

The professional representation also points to international experience, according to which a broad setup of outpatient structures increases the resilience of the healthcare system. A sole concentration on primary care centers, by contrast, can entrench structural gaps across regions, the professional society argues.

The background to the statement is an ongoing expansion plan with which the responsible bodies want to reorganize primary care in Austria. PVN are regarded as networks of several general practitioner practices that jointly offer certain services without requiring a common organizational roof in the form of a center.

Outlook on further negotiations

Observers assess the ÖGAM's position as an attempt to help shape the course at an early stage, before further funds flow into center structures. The professional society sees itself as the representation of office-based general medicine and wants to ensure that its working conditions do not fall behind. It insists that the ministry's funds be distributed across several pillars.

In the political debate, the demand for equivalent framework conditions is likely to find a receptive audience among those voices that already call for a strengthening of local care. Whether the responsible bodies will incorporate the suggestions into their expansion plans is currently open. The ÖGAM announced that it intends to continue the dialogue with those responsible.

In parallel, the professional society pointed to the looming shortage of family doctors, which exists regardless of organizational form. Without additional capacity and more attractive working conditions, neither a center nor a single practice will be able to secure care in the long term, according to the conclusion of the statement. The message is: structures are important, but they do not replace personnel.

A spokesperson for the responsible ministry has so far not responded to the criticism. Observers assume that the statement will feed into the ongoing negotiations on care planning. The question of how the relationship between PVEs and alternative models will be balanced in the future therefore remains unanswered for now.