This was posted 4 months 7 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Medicare Rebate for Prepair 3 Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening via Doctor's Referral

630
Medicare Rebate for Prepair 3 Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening via Doctor's Referral
Go to Deal
Quppa on 21/12/2023 - 17:29 vcgs.org.au (1460 clicks)
Last edited 21/12/2023 - 17:34 by 1 other user

May be of interest for prospective parents. You will need a doctor's referral.

$389 for non-Medicare patients. prepair 500+ and prepair 1000+ cover more conditions but aren't free.

As of 1 November 2023, 3-condition carrier screening for cystic fibrosis (CF), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) and fragile X syndrome (FXS) is subsidised by Medicare.

3-condition test prepair 3 is bulk billed directly to Medicare for eligible patients. This means eligible patients won’t have any out-of-pocket expenses.

The cost to non-Medicare-eligible patients is $389 per reproductive partner.

Screening is sequential and starts with the female reproductive partner. Follow up screening for the male reproductive partner is recommended if the female is a carrier for CF or SMA.

Health & Beauty Genetic Screening

Related Stores

Victorian Clinical Genetics Services
Victorian Clinical Genetics Services
Services Australia
Services Australia

closed Comments

  • cocomelon on 21/12/2023 - 17:50
    +8

    arent we(australian) lucky

    • YoursTruly on 21/12/2023 - 18:37
      +1

      Not sure if this is sarcasam or tears of joy…😅

    • xdigger on 21/12/2023 - 18:39
      +3

      We still have free healthcare for now…. but not sure after the bill for Aukus nuke subs comes from Uncle Sam.

      • salmon123 on 21/12/2023 - 22:02
        +5

        We still have free healthcare for now

        We do? Last I time checked, I paid more in Medicare levy and private health insurance than my colleagues in the US. If I needed an elective procedure in hospital my out-of-pocket expenses would've been a lot more than my US colleagues. My local hospital (NSW) doesn't have an outpatient clinic for diabetes. If I need to see an endocrinologist, private ($$$) is the only option. The next closest hospital with a diabetes outpatient clinic doesn't see out-of-area patients.

        Oh yeah, all the GPs in my area stopped bulk-billing years ago and as a nice little F-U charge me to receive negative results for any test.

        Are you sure you're living in Oztralia?

        • xdigger on 21/12/2023 - 22:37
          +2

          So it begins, the Americanization of Australia with the gradual change into expensive private healthcare…

          • salmon123 on 22/12/2023 - 15:05
            -1

            @xdigger:

            So it begins, the Americanization of Australia with the gradual change into expensive private healthcare…

            I think it began a long time ago. The health system in American is awesome if you have insurance. The health system in Australia sucks, when I do have insurance, because it barely covers anything.

            • shkippy on 23/12/2023 - 14:20

              @salmon123: I think your opinion seems very anecdotal and very much weighted towards "if you have insurance". While also not taking into account any exclusions (eg certain pre-existing conditions etc.) or type of insurance. Overall here is a write up on it that I'm sure has been researched a lot more than you or I have done:

              Some hospitals and health services in the US provide the best care in the world, albeit at very high cost.
              Overall, the US health system is very expensive and costs roughly twice as much as the Australian health system per person.
              Despite this, Americans have lower life expectancy than Australians.

              Your local hospital might not have an outpatient endocrinology clinic, but there are certainly many that do. If you can't/don't want to travel to one that does, then yes you can still see a privately billed one, but at least you still get a rebate from medicare.

              • salmon123 on 24/12/2023 - 16:42

                @shkippy:

                I think your opinion seems very anecdotal

                Its not anecdotal. I don't have these conditions. It's experience from working in the system.

                While also not taking into account any exclusions (eg certain pre-existing conditions etc.) or type of insurance.

                My comments about US insurance were related to employer sponsored insurance, which typically doesn't exclude pre-existing conditions. Australian private health insurance doesn't have pre-existing condition exclusions either, but it might have waiting periods. Sorry you missed that.

                very much weighted towards "if you have insurance"

                Yeah - glad you understood that point. I believe private health insurance coverage in Australia is around 55% of the population. It's much higher in a city like Sydney. We should be demanding much more.

                Americans have lower life expectancy than Australians.

                Probably an artefact of poor health insurance coverage rates in the US.

                then yes you can still see a privately billed one, but at least you still get a rebate from medicare.

                The rebate is miniscule.

                • salmon123 on 24/12/2023 - 21:39

                  @salmon123: @shkippy:

                  Wait till you need to see a dermatologist for something - there's basically no public services available in Sydney.

        • shkippy on 21/12/2023 - 23:04
          +2

          Did you hear they were gonna make an Australian version of breaking bad? With a school teacher getting lung cancer, so he goes to hospital for treatment and then returns home.

  • salmon123 on 21/12/2023 - 18:01
    +9

    How does a pre-conception test like this attract a Medicare rebate but something like a post-conception NIPT doesn't?

    Has all the hallmarks of the government looking after their mates.

    • Quppa on 21/12/2023 - 18:40
      +10

      This seems to be partly thanks to lobbying from Mackenzie's Mission. Article from the RACGP here.

      Neither side of politics seems keen on subsidising NIPT at this stage, basically due to cost.

      • Jolakot on 21/12/2023 - 20:17
        +2

        Most common in Caucasians for 2 and most common in Africans for the other, what are you even talking about?

      • corky on 21/12/2023 - 20:26
        +5

        Niece died at 4 months from SMA. Previously parents unaware they were carriers. Not Jewish

        • alidli on 21/12/2023 - 20:42
          -1

          Very sorry to hear that corky and hope the family are managing to cope with their tragic loss.

          It sickens me that the government can find tens of billions for a few submarines, then turn round and deny funding for so many other good causes.

          • Tony-Abbott on 21/12/2023 - 21:14
            +1

            @alidli: It is being funded….. As per the OP.

          • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 21:31

            @alidli: In this case they haven’t denied funding for carrier screening, or SMA treatment (it’s on PBS now)

          • corky on 22/12/2023 - 19:52
            +1

            @alidli: Thanks for your kind response. Yes it was very tough. The screening can only help

      • cski on 21/12/2023 - 21:31
        +1

        I think may people have. 0.45% jewish if they are causation, since the high dispersion of jewish through society, unfortunately in some cases secretly through fear of discrimination.

    • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 21:30
      +3

      It’s also a cost effective issue. If simply one case of SMA is avoided by carrier screening, the government will have saved $2.5 million (Zolgesma). That would pay for 6,500 carrier screening tests.

      • salmon123 on 21/12/2023 - 21:53

        It’s also a cost effective issue.

        As are most things in our health system - eg drugs available on PBS, cancer treatment, etc

        I wasn't able to find any meaningful analysis on the economics of this screen test vs something like NIPT, which makes me think the government (or health department) probably didn't do any meaningful analysis either.

        The reasons are probably deeply political. Offering free NIPT might lead to more terminations which could upset the catholic lobby.

        • bargain huntress on 21/12/2023 - 22:11
          +1

          Offering free NIPT might lead to more terminations

          It definitely does

          Just as embryo screening leads to more destroyed embryos

          Thats most of the point of doing it

        • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 23:34
          +1

          Possibly, but could also be societal? NIPT is done at 12 weeks (earlier at 10 weeks is possible) and allows you to know the sex of the baby. Terminations because it’s male or female would be a big problem in society too.

        • Quppa on 22/12/2023 - 00:47
          +2

          The Medical Services Advisory Committee did analysis of subsidising NIPT (from the ABC article above). I don't know if the cost-effectiveness of carrier screening is better or worse.

          In its 2018 decision, the federal government's Medical Services Advisory Committee did not support subsidising NIPT on "cost-effectiveness grounds".

          It found that funding the tests would cost the government an extra $100 million a year and only detect 195 extra cases of the three genetic conditions in the test, out of 1,080 cases that occurred annually.

  • Gdsamp on 21/12/2023 - 18:06
    -3

    only for VIC?

    • eggboi on 21/12/2023 - 18:41
      +2

      What? Why would that be? Medicare is national

      • Misha Bakunin on 21/12/2023 - 20:10
        -2

        Is it though?

        • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 21:32
          +3

          Yes it is. Medicare is federally funded.
          What they fund is completely listed on MBS online.

          Carrier screening is funded by Medicare, not the stare government (who fund public hospitals).

          • Gdsamp on 21/12/2023 - 23:16
            +1

            @ozbking: good to know. link posted was for a VIC clinic not a govt Medicare link hence my question

  • oraserat on 21/12/2023 - 18:18
    +2

    thank you
    good job
    important information for some and very important to prevent these conditions if possible

    • peternow on 21/12/2023 - 19:19
      +1

      You can't prevent them, but you can identify as early as possible through testing such as this and make informed decisions with assistance from medical professionals.

      • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 21:33

        You can prevent it by choosing IVF and avoiding a fetus with the disease.

  • xdigger on 21/12/2023 - 18:40
    +11

    Great deal OP, now all I need is a female reproductive partner.

    • eggboi on 21/12/2023 - 18:42

      Become a sperm donor? Or find an egg donor and a surrogate?

    • shiznit on 21/12/2023 - 20:08
      +5

      Who could possibly refuse after you tell them about this deal?

  • iguana on 21/12/2023 - 18:57
    +1

    What happens when the results come back positive for those conditions?

    • Dsiee on 21/12/2023 - 19:04
      +5

      They then test the partner. If the partner is negative then all good (probably), if the partner is positive then it is a case for reproductive counseling as to what the options are.

      • cski on 21/12/2023 - 21:33

        Takes two to tango i guess

    • dazweeja on 21/12/2023 - 20:39
      +1

      One option is IVF and preimplantation embryo screening (some Medicare rebates for screening three embryos per cycle). Obviously not a cheap process.

    • ozbking on 21/12/2023 - 21:37
      +1

      Normally a genetic counsellor automatically contacts you to explain what options there are

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join