Malta ranked 25th in the Euro Health Consumer Index 2016, out of 35 countries.
It was given 666 points, up from 663 points in 2015.
The index, by the Health Consumer Powerhouse, measures to what extent countries meet expectations of good, consumer – friendly healthcare.
Malta was deemed to have “decent accessibility”, but was not too “strong on treatment results.
“There seem to be gaps in the public subsidy system of Maltese healthcare. This is particularly prominent for drug subsidies; many Maltese do not bother with receiving a subsidy. The result is that Malta has little data on drug use!” the index report said.
The report adjusts the figures to reflect purchasing power, showing that Malta’s per capita spending was just over $3,000 – putting it in 20th place – with Luxembourg spending the most ($6,800) and Albania the least ($600).
The index showed that the publicly-funded healthcare systems of Europe have steadily improved over the past 10 years. In 2015, only eight countries scored above 800 out of the maximum 1,000 points; last year that went up to 11 countries. In the 2008 report, the top country scored 84 per cent, while in 2016 the winner scored 93 per cent, with 11 countries scoring above 80 per cent.
The Netherlands topped the EHCI 2016 ranking with 927 points, only having broken the 900-point barrier in 2015. It overtook Switzerland, which got 904 points.
It is inherently cheaper to run a healthcare system without waiting lists than having waiting lists
HCP founder and president Johan Hjertqvist said: “Value-for-money health systems are in the international searchlight. What will be affordable and sustainable to countries with ageing populations, funding deficits and shortage of workforce? This is a tough nut to crack for national governments as well as to the European Commission and the OECD. We dare say that there is today enough knowledge to repair failing systems – but is there enough determination?”
The report is scathing about waiting times, saying that these were “a mental condition affecting healthcare administrators and professionals rather than a scarcity of resources problem”.
“Over the years, one fact becomes clear: gatekeeping means waiting. Contrary to popular belief, direct access to specialist care does not generate access problems to specialists by the increased demand; repeatedly, waiting times for specialist care are found predominately in systems requiring referral from primary care, which seems to be rather an absurd observation.”
One of the important points the report made this year is that there is no correlation between accessibility to healthcare and the money spent.
“It is inherently cheaper to run a healthcare system without waiting lists than having waiting lists. Contrary to popular belief, not least among healthcare politicians, waiting lists do not save money – they cost money!
“Healthcare is basically a process industry. As any professional manager from such an industry would know, smooth procedures with a minimum of pause or interruption is key to keeping costs low!” it said.
“This could explain the limited effect of showering €1 billion over Swedish counties to make them reduce waiting times.”
The report was honest about its own limitations, saying there was a shortage of pan-European, uniform set procedures for data gathering.
“The Health Consumer Powerhouse finds it far better to present the results, and to promote constructive discussion rather than staying with the only too common opinion that as long as healthcare information is not a 100 per cent complete it should be kept in the closet.”