Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK
For members

HEALTH INSURANCE

COMPARE: Is Swiss healthcare better value for money than elsewhere in Europe?

Swiss voters will soon decide whether the country’s health insurance premiums should be capped at 10 percent of income. But an analysis reveals that in many aspects of healthcare, the country’s population is better off than their European neighbours.

Published: 23 May 2024 15:30 CEST
COMPARE: Is Swiss healthcare better value for money than elsewhere in Europe?
in Switzerland, you get what you pay for. Photo: Kristine Wook on Unsplash

Right now, the average basic insurance premium is about 500 francs per month per person, which represents a significant part of the household budget.

While low-income individuals and families get financial help from the government to cover this cost, it strains the budget of middle-class households.

That is why left-wing parties and trade unions have launched an initiative, to be voted on June 9th, seeking to cap insurance rates at 10 percent of income.

However, while the Swiss system is undoubtedly expensive, a new analysis carried out by RTS public broadcaster indicates that, in terms of health insurance, residents of other European nations carry quite a burden as well.

The differences lie primarily in who finances the scheme — public versus private — and how the overall system functions.

READ ALSO: How is Swiss healthcare system different from the rest of Europe?

But other countries don’t necessarily have ‘free’ or even ‘inexpensive’ health care, the RTS found.

Based on data from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which RTS used in its survey, eight countries pour more money into funding their healthcare than Switzerland does.

In Germany, for instance, a per-capita expenditure on health is 25 percent higher than in Switzerland — 4,408 euros versus 3,503.

In Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Austria, Sweden, Luxembourg, and France, the amount also exceeds Switzerland’s.

Consequently, in many of the countries, healthcare spending takes out a larger chunk of their GDPs than in Switzerland.

The difference is that Swiss system is bankrolled by premiums, while that of other nations mostly by taxes — in both cases, therefore, the money comes out of the pockets of private individuals.

While there have been efforts to replace Switzerland’s private system with a public one, the RTS analysis shows this may not be the best option for the country.

But do residents of Switzerland actually get a ‘better deal’ in terms of healthcare than other Europeans?

In other words, is a costly healthcare system better for patients than a cheaper one?

Based on the OECD data, Switzerland’s insurance-based healthcare scheme did better than the OECD average in terms of life expectancy, preventable mortality rate, and access to health services, among others.

And according to the US-based Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP), Switzerland has the world’s most advanced health system, out of 31 countries ranked. 

What exactly does this mean?

For the purposes of this survey, FREOPP considered factors such as patients’ ability to choose a doctor and insurance company; the use of scientific and technological advances in healthcare; and the availability of new medical treatments.

Switzerland also beats other countries in terms of wait time for medical procedures.

Another OECD survey on how long patients in various countries typically wait for an appointment with a specialist, the share of people in Switzerland waiting a month or more is 23 percent, compared to 36 percent in France, 52 percent in Sweden, and 61 percent in Norway.

OECD statistics also show that Switzerland has among the shortest waits for medical tests and procedures.

All in all, “the Swiss healthcare system is the best in Europe in terms of access to medical services,” according to a Swiss physician, Dr Kathrin Zimmermann. “This means very short time spans between a medical condition being identified and treatment starting.”

She pointed out that the European Health Consumer Index (EHCI) compared waiting times for major elective surgeries, cancer treatments and CT scans.

“Switzerland scored maximum points in all areas,” she said.
 
READ ALSO: How long is the wait for medical procedures in Switzerland?

The only area where Switzerland lags behind others in Europe is in regards to out-of-pocket spending (co-pay), as well as the cost of medications.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

HEALTH INSURANCE

It’s not over: What happens now after Swiss reject health insurance changes?

On Sunday, Swiss voters rejected two initiatives to curb the price of obligatory health insurance premiums. But this doesn't mean nothing will change.

Published: 10 June 2024 15:18 CEST
It's not over: What happens now after Swiss reject health insurance changes?

Though early surveys indicated that the initiative spearheaded by the Social Democratic Party, seeking to cap insurance rates at 10 percent of income, would be overwhelmingly accepted, on Sunday 55.5 percent of voters turned it down.

Among the main reasons for the rejection was that implementing this measure (which already exists in Switzerland in the form of subsidies for low-income families) would cost several billion francs a year, further increasing the already very high healthcare costs.

While Social Democrats said the referendum results “are disappointing,” according to business association Economiesuisse,“the Swiss understood that the ‘10-percent initiative’ was misleading.” 

With the ‘no’ vote, “billions of francs in additional costs will be avoided,” the group added.

Another commentator pointed out that “the left is launching initiatives without ever saying how we are going to finance it all.” 

The second health insurance initiative voted on Sunday, that sought to provide a ‘brake’ on health costs, was turned down by 62.7 percent of voters. 

READ ALSO: Support for proposals to curb Swiss health insurance costs wanes 

What will happen to health insurance premiums now?

The Federal Council and the parliament have urged the ‘no’ vote to both, creating counter-proposals to each of the two initiatives — that is, their own bills in response to the concerns raised in the initiatives.

Counter-proposals, which are usually more moderate and more ‘implementable’ than original initiatives — come into force automatically if the initiative is rejected.

Under the counter-proposal to the ’10 percent’ initiative, cantons will have to earmark between 3.5 and 7.5 percent of their budgets for premium reductions of the costs of compulsory health insurance on their territories, while the federal government will continue to contribute 7.5 percent.

While this implies that hundreds of millions of francs of public money will be spent to alleviate the ‘premium burden’ of low-income households, it will still be less than about 6 billion that the original initiative required.

What about the ‘cost brake’ initiative?

In this case, the counter-proposal provides for the government to set a limit every four years on the increase in the costs of compulsory health insurance.

The Federal Council as well as the cantons will consider not only wage growth (as the original initiative sought to do), but also the aging population and other demographic trends, medical progress, as well as  other factors that play a role in health insurance premiums.

Additionally, the Federal Council wants to set up a commission for monitoring costs and quality of health insurance.

And there is more

The left-wing parties have already said they would continue to force  referendums aiming to cut the cost of health insurance.

The Greens are now focusing on basing insurance premiums on income.

As for Social Democrats, the party said it will now “work on launching an initiative for public health insurance.”

Neither of these ideas are new.

The implementation of income-based premiums, while supported by various parties, doesn’t seem likely.

The current system is widely thought to be “fair and balanced”, according to Lukas Engelberger, president of Cantonal Health Directors Association.

That’s because the system in place is based on solidarity  — the idea that all insured people form a group.

It can be thought of in terms of a huge pot to which each resident of Switzerland makes a contribution (that is, premium payments), so that in an emergency there are enough resources available to give someone the help they need when they need it.

If the present approach were to change, however, and become income-based, it would be difficult to maintain the solidarity component which, according to officials, has proven its worth.

READ ALSO:  How the Swiss health insurance system is based on solidarity 

In terms of one state-run health insurance scheme, as is the case elsewhere in Europe, Social Democrats have been calling for scrapping of multiple private carriers in favour of the government running the scheme for a while.

The reason for this radical change is that “with a single player, it will be easier to maintain decent prices,” according to MP Baptiste Hurni, who is behind this proposal.

In a 2014 referendum on this subject, 62 percent of voters said ‘no’ to the plan,  with those opposing arguing that a private insurance system offers more choices  and provides a higher quality of services —including better access to specialists and shorter wait times for medical procedures —  than a public option.

They also pointed out that higher premiums are inevitable given an ageing population and higher life expectancy, and shifting to a public system would generate few savings.

However, attitudes may have changed in the last 10 years.

A survey conducted by the Basel Center for Health Economics (BCHE) in January 2024, showed that 68 percent of Switzerland’s population would like the current system to be replaced by a single health insurer.

READ ALSO: Could Switzerland ever change to state-run health insurance scheme? 

SHOW COMMENTS