Austria is even 2008 one of the top-performer in the 2008 Euro Health Consumer Index

The 2008 Euro Health Consumer Index has a completely novel ranking situation. In previous EHCI editions, as well as in the Euro Consumer Heart Index 2008 and the Euro Consumer Diabetes Index 2008 (all available at www.healthpowerhouse.com), 3 – 5 top countries are separated by only a few points on the 1000-point scale. The EHCI 2008 total ranking of healthcare systems shows an unprecedented landslide victory for The Netherlands, scoring 839 points out of 1000, 19 points ahead of runners-up Denmark at 820 points, with a 36-point gap to the 2007 winners Austria in 3rd place with 784 points. The ranking is noticeably influenced by the introduction of an additional sixth sub-discipline, “e-Health” (for more information on e-Health sub-discipline see section e-Health), measuring essentially the penetration of electronic medical records and the use of web-based solutions for the transfer of medical information. Denmark is the only country scoring all Green on the four indicators, and The Netherlands score three Greens and one Yellow (see Section 9.7 for explanation on scoring colours). Although the e-Health sub-discipline has been given a modest weight, these scores are enough to catapult these two countries far ahead of European competition.

This should not at all be dismissed as an effect of changing indicators, of which there are 34 in the EHCI 2008, up from 28 in the previous year, and/or sub-disciplines. The Netherlands is the only country which has consistently been among the top three in the total ranking of any European Index the Health Consumer Powerhouse has published since 2005. Although being the sub-discipline winner, scoring full maximum points, in only one sub-discipline of the EHCI 2008; “Range and reach of services provided” (formerly called "Generosity” in previous EHCI editions), the Dutch healthcare system does not seem to have any really weak spots in the other sub-disciplines, except possibly some scope for improvement regarding the waiting times situation, where some central European countries excel.

Normally, the HCP takes care to state that the EHCI is limited to measuring the “consumer friendliness” of healthcare systems, i.e. does not claim to measure which European state has the best healthcare system across the board.

However, the fact that is seems very difficult to build an Index of the HCP type without ending up with The Netherlands on the medallists‟ podium, creates a strong temptation to actually claim that the landslide winner of the EHCI 2008 could indeed be said to have “the best healthcare system in Europe”.

Denmark does gain a lot from the introduction of the e-Health sub-discipline. Non the less, as can been seen from the longitudinal analysis in Chapter 7, Denmark has been on a continuous rise since it was first included in the EHCI 2006. It would seem that the dedicated efforts made by Danish politicians and public agencies, to achieve a real upgrade of the healthcare system in Denmark, are paying off. This is corroborated by the fact than Denmark emerged as the total winner of the Euro Consumer Diabetes Index 2008.

On the bronze medallist‟s step on the podium resides the 2007 winner Austria at 784 points; not doing as well on e-Health services but scoring the first ever full score in the pharmaceuticals sub-discipline. Luxembourg comes in 4th at 758 points and Germany 6th at 740. These three countries offer truly excellent accessibility to healthcare services, but as they do not reach the same score levels on the heavily weighted (“the proof of the pudding is in the eating”) Outcomes sub-discipline as do Sweden and the Netherlands, they do not quite reach the top.