World Health Systems Facts currently has sections on the US and sixteen other OECD nations. The links below lead directly to national sections on Healthcare Spending:

“In 2019, prior to the COVID‑19 pandemic, OECD countries spent, on average, around 8.8% of their GDP on health care – a figure more or less unchanged since 2013. The United States spent by far the most on health care, equivalent to 16.8% of its GDP – well above Germany, the next highest spending country, at 11.7% (Figure 7.1). After the United States and Germany, a group of ten high-income countries, including France, Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom, all spent more than 10% of their GDP on health care. A further dozen countries spread across OECD countries, but also including Brazil and South Africa, sit within a band of health spending of 8‑10% of GDP. The next block of countries spending between 6% and 8% of their GDP on health care includes many of the central and eastern European OECD countries, as well as the newer members from the Latin America region – Colombia and Costa Rica. Finally, Mexico and Turkey spent less than 6% of GDP on health, alongside some of the partner countries, such as the People’s Republic of China (China) and India.

“Preliminary estimates for 2020 for a number of OECD countries all point to a significant increase in the ratio of health spending to GDP. This reflects both the extra health spending needed to combat COVID‑19 and reductions in GDP caused by restrictions on economic activity. Based on the initial data, the average share of GDP allocated to health is estimated to have jumped from 8.8% in 2019 to 9.7% in 2020. Those countries most severely affected by the pandemic reported unprecedented increases in the share of GDP allocated to health. The United Kingdom estimated an increase from 10.2% in 2019 to 12.8% in 2020, while Slovenia anticipated its share of spending on health rising from 8.5% to more than 10%.”

Source: OECD (2021), Health at a Glance 2021: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ae3016b9-en.

“In 2018, global spending on health reached US$8.3 trillion, about 10% of global GDP. Domestic public sources took the largest share, which at US$4.9 trillion accounted for 59% of global spending in 2018 (Figure 1.1).¹ Private health spending was US$3.4 trillion, or 41% of global spending, of which most was household out-of-pocket spending (OOPS). Health spending from external aid accounted for 0.2% of global spending, the same as in the previous year.

“More than 75% of global spending on health was in the World Health Organization (WHO) regions of the Americas and Europe. The countries of the Western Pacific region accounted for 19% of global spending, while those of the South-East Asian and Eastern Mediterranean regions each accounted for 2% of global spending, and the African region for 1%. In 2018, 40% of the world’s people lived in 51 countries with per capita health spending below US$100. Five countries (France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States), with 9% of the world’s people, accounted for more than 60% of global health spending, with the United States alone accounting for 42% (Figures 1.2 & 1.3).

“Thus, health spending remained unequal across countries (Figure 1.3). Globally, the cross-country average of health spending per capita was US$1,099 in 2018.² But in low income countries, the average was only US$40 a person that year, while in high income countries, it was US$3,313—more than 80 times larger (Figure 1.4).³ The difference has grown over time, with cross-country inequality in health spending rising. On average, health spending per capita was US$115 in lower middle income countries and US$ 466 in upper middle income countries in 2018.”

Source: Global spending on health 2020: weathering the storm. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

“Per capita health spending continued to rise in real terms, but growth recently slowed (Figure 1.5.a). The average annual growth of health spending has been consistently above 2% over the past two decades. Before the 2008–2009 economic crisis, health spending growth was above 3% a year. During the crisis, health spending grew more than 5% from 2008 to 2009, while GDP dropped more than 1% on average. This pattern was more pronounced in high income countries, where most governments implemented countercyclical fiscal policy to mitigate the impact of the economic shock (Figure 1.5.b). Due to short-term measures, public spending on health actually grew faster during the 2008–2009 economic crisis as compared with previous years. But following the economic recovery, overall government spending increased more slowly. Between 2014 and 2017, health spending per capita grew faster than GDP. But in 2018, the situation reversed, with GDP growth exceeding health spending growth.

“In general, the level of health spending depends on the level of country income, but there are variations within income groups. High income countries spent 8.2% of GDP on health on average in 2018 (Figure 1.6). Low income countries spent 6.4% of GDP on health, and upper middle income countries, 6.3%. The lowest share was in the lower middle income countries group—4.8%. Within every country income group, health spending as a share of GDP varies widely. Countries with a similar GDP per capita spent very different proportions of GDP on health. For example, Thailand and South Africa, with roughly equal GDPs per capita, spent vastly different shares of GDP on health, with South Africa spending much more (8.3%) than Thailand (3.8%). Generally, there is no clear correlation between income and share of health spending within any income group. The policy choices that each country makes in the organization of its health financing system, as well as differences in epidemiological patterns, have important implications for health spending levels and likely explain much of the observed variation.”

Source: Global spending on health 2020: weathering the storm. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

“In a number of European countries, there have been significant turnarounds in health spending. In Greece, the strong annual decreases in growth halted after 2013, even if growth in health spending has been close to zero overall since 2013 (-9.4% in the time period 2008‑13 vs. 0.2% in the time period 2013‑18), and real per capita spending in 2018 remained almost a third below the 2009 level. A similar if less dramatic picture can also be seen in Iceland (-3.0% vs. 4.0%). In other European countries, such as Germany and Norway, health spending remained relatively stable over the ten-year period, with annual growth of between 2.0-2.5%. Overall, health spending growth has picked up in the majority of European countries in most recent years.

“Outside of Europe, Korea and Chile have continued to report annual health spending increases above 5% in real terms since 2008. A provisional estimate for 2018 suggests further strong spending growth of 9.0% in Korea. In the United States, health spending is estimated to have grown by 1.4% in real terms in 2018, which along with similar growth in 2017 shows health spending in the United States growing slower than the overall economy.”

Source: OECD (2019), Health at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi.org/10.1787/4dd50c09-en.

“In 2019, average per capita health spending in OECD countries (when adjusted for differences in purchasing power) was estimated to be more than USD 4,000, while in the United States it reached the equivalent of almost USD 11,000 for every US citizen. Switzerland, the next highest spender among OECD countries, had health expenditure of around two‑thirds of this level (Figure 7.4). In addition to Switzerland, only a handful of high-income OECD countries, including Germany, Norway and Sweden, spent more than half of the US spending on health, while others, such as Japan and the United Kingdom, were around the OECD average. Lowest per capita spenders on health among OECD member countries were Colombia, Turkey and Mexico, with health expenditure of around a quarter of the OECD average. Latest available estimates show that per capita spending in China was just under 20% of the OECD average, while both India and Indonesia spent between 6% and 8% of this figure.”

Source: OECD (2021), Health at a Glance 2021: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ae3016b9-en.

“Drawing on publicly available national household budget survey data, the report provides up-to-date numbers on financial protection for 24 highand middle-income countries in Europe.

“• The incidence of impoverishing health spending in the study countries ranges from 0.3% to 9.0% of households. There is wide variation among European Union (EU) countries (from 0.3% to 5.9%) and among non-EU countries also (from 3.6% to 9.0%).

“• The incidence of catastrophic health spending ranges from 1% to 17% of households in the study countries. It varies widely among the 18 EU countries in the study, including wide variation among countries that joined the EU after 30 April 2004.

“• Catastrophic health spending is consistently heavily concentrated among the poorest fifth of the population.

“• Out-of-pocket payments incurred by households with catastrophic health spending are mainly due to outpatient medicines, followed by inpatient care and dental care.”

Source: Can people afford to pay for health care? New evidence on financial protection in Europe. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2019. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

“Financial protection indicators capture financial hardship arising from the use of health services, but do not indicate whether out-of-pocket payments create a barrier to access, resulting in unmet need. Bringing together for the first time data on financial hardship and unmet need across Europe reveals the following findings.

“• In countries where the incidence of catastrophic health spending is very low, unmet need also tends to be low and without significant income inequality.

“• In a few countries, the incidence of catastrophic health spending is relatively low, but there is a high level of unmet need, particularly among poor households, which suggests that health care is not as affordable as the financial protection indicators alone imply.

“• In many countries, the incidence of catastrophic health spending and levels of unmet need are both relatively high, and income inequality in unmet need is also significant, indicating that health services are not at all affordable, and that if everyone were able to use the services they needed, financial hardship would be even greater, particularly among
poorer households.

“• Some health services – notably dental care – are a much greater source of financial hardship for richer households than poorer households. This reflects higher levels of unmet need for dental care among poorer households than richer households in most countries.

“• Outpatient medicines are an important source of financial hardship in many countries and among the poorest quintile in most countries.

“• Unmet need for prescribed medicines is also generally higher in countries with a higher incidence of catastrophic health spending, which indicates that out-of-pocket payments for medicines lead to both financial hardship and unmet need for poorer people.”

Source: Can people afford to pay for health care? New evidence on financial protection in Europe. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2019. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

World Health Systems Facts is a project of the Real Reporting Foundation. We provide reliable statistics and other data from authoritative sources regarding health systems and policies in the US and sixteen other nations.

Breaking News

• Baker Institute: More Texans Insured Thanks To The ACA November 23, 2023
  November 23, 2023 Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy reports that more Texans have health insurance coverage now thanks to the Affordable Care Act. According to the Institute’s November 14 issue brief, entitled Looking at the Numbers: 10 Years of Data on the Affordable Care Act Reveal Benefits for Texans: “When the ACA was enacted in ...
• Update: Medicare Drug Price Negotiations Moving Forward October 19, 2023
  Negotiations between the federal government and the manufacturers of ten prescription drugs over prices for the Medicare program are moving forward. The American Hospital Association reported on Oct. 3, 2023 (“CMS: Makers of selected drugs agree to participate in Medicare price negotiation”): “The companies that make the first 10 Medicare Part D drugs selected to participate ...
• Medicare and Medicare Advantage October 15, 2023
  Medicare is a complicated system that mixes public and private insurance providers. As reported by the Scripps News Service on Oct. 21, 2022 (“Why Is Medicare So Complicated?”): “By the government’s last count in 2021, 64 million adults were enrolled in Medicare. But that doesn’t mean it’s simple to navigate. The Medicare maze is growing more ...
• Medicare Open Enrollment Season Runs October 15 – December 7 October 15, 2023
  Open enrollment season for Medicare is October 15 through December 7. According to the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (last accessed Oct. 15, 2023): “Medicare health and drug plans can make changes each year—things like cost, coverage, and what providers and pharmacies are in their networks. October 15 to December 7 is when all ...
• List of Drugs For Which Medicare Will Negotiate Prices Announced September 1, 2023
  September 1, 2023 On August 30, 2023, Kaiser Health News reported (“5 Things to Know About the New Drug Pricing Negotiations”): “The Biden administration has picked the first 10 high-priced prescription drugs subject to federal price negotiations, taking a swipe at the powerful pharmaceutical industry. It marks a major turning point in a long-fought battle to control ...
• Learning From Others June 14, 2023
  June 14, 2023 Professor Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS, is the Chief Health Officer of Indiana University. In a guest essay comparing the US health care system with the systems of five other nations that was published June 13, 2023 in the New York Times (“I Studied Five Countries’ Health Care Systems. We Need to Get ...
• Practice Consolidation and Access to Quality Care May 14, 2023
  May 14, 2023 The New York Times reports on a growing trend among healthcare organizations in the US, the impact of which may be of concern for patients and taxpayers. The Times reported on May 8, 2023 (“Corporate Giants Buy Up Primary Care Practices at Rapid Pace”) that: “CVS Health, with its sprawling pharmacy business and ownership ...
• Medicaid Re-Enrollment Begins Again April 1, 2023
  US states are restarting yearly Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility reviews. The Kaiser Family Foundation reported on February 22, 2023 (“10 Things to Know About the Unwinding of the Medicaid Continuous Enrollment Provision”): “Primarily due to the continuous enrollment provision, Medicaid enrollment has grown substantially compared to before the pandemic and the uninsured rate has dropped. ...
• The Existential Threat of Greed in US Health Care February 7, 2023
  February 7, 2023 The journal JAMA published a Viewpoint on Jan. 30, 2023 by Donald Berwick, MD, MPP, entitled Salve Lucrum: The Existential Threat of Greed in US Health Care. In it, Dr. Berwick contends: “Profit may have its place in motivating innovation and higher quality in health care, as in any industry. But kleptocapitalist behaviors that raise ...
• Oregon Becomes First US State To Guarantee Its Residents Access To Affordable Healthcare January 20, 2023
  January 20, 2023 In the November 2022 general election, Oregon voters narrowly approved Oregon Measure 111, the Right to Healthcare Amendment. The measure amended the state constitution, adding a guarantee of access to affordable healthcare for all Oregon residents. According to Ballotpedia, last accessed Jan. 20, 2023: “Ballot title “The ballot title was as follows:“Amends Constitution: State must ...
• Massive Savings Possible In US Health System October 21, 2021
  October 21, 2021 The management consulting firm McKinsey & Company has issued a new report estimating that administrative changes and efficiencies could save the US health system more than a quarter trillion dollars. As noted in a Viewpoint article published in JAMA on October 20: “The analysis dissected profit and loss statements of individual health care organizations, estimated ...
• Health Care in the US Compared to Other High-Income Countries August 6, 2021
  On August 4, the Commonwealth Fund issued a new report entitled Mirror, Mirror 2021: Reflecting Poorly / Health Care in the US Compared to Other High-Income Countries. The report compares health care systems in eleven nations: the United States, Canada, Switzerland, France, Sweden, New Zealand, Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, the Netherlands, and Norway. The report’s key ...
• Medical Debt in Collections in the US August 6, 2021
  On July 20, JAMA published an article on medical debt in collections in the US entitled “Medical Debt in the US, 2009-2020.” The researchers found: “In this retrospective analysis of credit reports for a nationally representative 10% panel of individuals, an estimated 17.8% of individuals in the US had medical debt in collections in June 2020 ...

Page last updated October 18, 2023 by Doug McVay, Editor.