Report: Invest in health for economic growth in Poland

A new report argues that Poland's public health debate, often focused on immediate financial shortfalls, queues, and staff wages, overlooks health's crucial role as a strategic national asset. The report, "Return on Investment in Health: A Catalyst for Economic Growth and Resilience – Recommendations for Poland," proposes shifting this perspective.

Authored by Polish clinicians, economists, and health policy experts, the report posits that health is not merely a budgetary burden but a key resource driving economic strength, productivity, and national resilience. It builds on analyses by the WifOR Institute, suggesting that every zloty spent on modern medicine generates economic returns. To fully harness this potential, Poland must transition from a reactive model of treating illness consequences to proactive investment in prevention and early disease detection.

The report highlights that approximately 144,000 preventable deaths occur annually in Poland due to inefficiencies in care and prevention. The resulting loss in GDP from premature deaths before age 75 is estimated at 2.9% of GDP, translating to 115 billion PLN in 2025. Furthermore, the state budget loses nearly 49 billion PLN annually from foregone public finances.

Experts identify underinvestment in prevention as a major issue. Poland allocates only about 1.7% of its total health expenditures to prevention, half the OECD average. In 2022, while the EU average spending on disease prevention was 202 euros per capita, Poland spent around 21.6 euros, compared to the Czech Republic's nearly 119 euros. This lack of preventive care leads to excessive hospitalizations, which consume half of the National Health Fund's budget. Many hospital stays could be avoided with better outpatient treatment or earlier diagnosis.

Despite rising overall health expenditures, projected to reach 8.1% of GDP in 2024, Poland lags behind the EU average of 10% of GDP. The system also places increasing pressure on public finances, with the NFZ deficit growing and requiring larger state budget subsidies. Factors like "medical inflation" and rigid spending mechanisms further complicate the situation, prompting calls for reforms beyond the current "n-2" calculation method for expenditures.