Health unions are split over a study giving poor marks to Malta’s public healthcare system, one agreeing with the dismal result and another saying the research was biased in favour of its sponsors.

Considering the money spent against the service, Maltese get a good deal

The Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses (MUMN) claimed the 2012 European Health Consumer Index “proves us right”, while the Medical Association of Malta (MAM) agreed with the Health Ministry about the influence of the pharmaceutical industry, which commissioned the study.

MAM claimed the index was “weighted on patients’ access to originator (new) drugs – as opposed to generics”.

Malta’s “very generous system” of providing free medicine thanks to more reliance on generics, which are much cheaper than originator drugs, guaranteed financial sustainability, MAM president Martin Balzan explained. “This is a good thing, but it has a negative weighting in the study,” he said, pointing out that the top-ranking countries did not offer as much free medicine as Malta.

The European Health Consumer Index, which analyses 34 countries, is carried out annually by a Swedish-based think-tank.

This year it ranked Malta’s free-to-all public healthcare system 23rd, saying it offered poor value for money, still lacked transparency, patients’ rights were weak and medical outcomes mediocre.

But MAM defended the system, saying Malta boasted one of the highest life expectancies. It pointed out that the higher number of congenital abnormalities and neonatal problems was due to the fact that abortion was illegal and said that when considering the money spent against the service offered, the Maltese got a good deal.

But MUMN president Paul Pace was not surprised at the low ranking, saying Malta did not offer a patient-focused service, compared to other hospitals, while still spending loads of money. It also lacked protocols on work procedures.

“Although we have a state-of-the-art hospital, we do not have a state-of-the-art service,” he said, citing bottlenecks throughout the system and a lack of harmonisation between departments that led to work being duplicated.

Mr Pace disagreed with the Health Ministry and MAM discrediting the think-tank.

“Had the report been positive, the minister would not have said it was influenced by its sponsors,” he said.

The government has lambasted the index, which, it claimed, contained erroneous information.