The Burrow
Dec 8, 2025
Everyone deserves quick medical attention when an emergency arises, but unfortunately, waiting times at hospitals are on the rise, which can be particularly frustrating for patients who are in pain when waiting to be seen.
Sadly, rising medical bills and a lack of hospital space are also affecting emergency health services worldwide, but which countries have the best emergency health services? To find out, the health insurance comparison experts at Compare the Market researched more than 80 countries around the world, comparing the quality of their emergency room infrastructure, health spending budgets, patient satisfaction scores and more.
From the average health spend per capita to the level of satisfaction with waiting times, we’ve scored each country from 0 to 100 to create a global ER infrastructure index. Here are the best (and worst) performing countries according to our rankings.
In our index, the closer a country scores to 100, the better its emergency room infrastructure is. These are the five countries that placed the highest on our list:
Scoring an impressive 75.46 out of 100 to top our list, Switzerland ranks as the country with the best ERs in the world. With an average of 4.5 doctors, 4.4 hospital beds, and 18.8 nurses/midwives per 1,000 people, it’s one of the best-equipped countries in Europe to deal with emergency medical demands.
With an average health expenditure of 8,632.16 Swiss Francs per capita ($16,554.78 AUD), its high-quality services are some of the best-funded in the world.
Belgium boasts the third-highest level of waiting time satisfaction worldwide, with patients rating their experience an average of 74.06 out of 100. Its doctors are also relatively fast at completing their examinations, with a score of 72.89 out of 100 on our rankings. Plus, with 12.9 nurses, 6.5 doctors, and 5.5 hospital beds per 1,000 people, there’s plenty of care to go around.
Its final index score of 69.31 earns it a second-place finish on our list.
With the second-highest hospital bed availability worldwide (12.7 per 1,000 people), and a stunning 81.67 out of 100 score on examination speed (the third highest in our rankings), Japan earns a bronze medal in our ER infrastructure index.
The country also enjoys a high ratio of medical personnel, with 2.6 doctors and 13 nurses/midwives for every 1,000 residents. These all add up to give it a final score of 69.29 out of 100, just 0.02 points behind Belgium!
Another East Asian country that places well in our rankings is South Korea, with a total score of 68.32 out of 100 on our index.
Our data shows that South Korean ERs are the fastest in the world at completing examinations and reports, with an average rating of 85.95 out of 100. They also top our waiting time satisfaction rankings (79.28 out of 100) and have the highest ratio of hospital beds to residents worldwide (12.8 per 1,000 people).
Capping off our list of the five countries with the best ER infrastructure is Austria. Its waiting time satisfaction rating of 63.29 out of 100 is notably lower than the rest of the top five, but with 11.3 nurses/midwives and 5.5 doctors per 1,000 people, it boasts a strong medical workforce.
These all contribute to its final index score of 66.67 out of 100, beating stiff competition from Norway (63.39) in sixth and Luxembourg (63.35) in seventh.
Now that we’ve discussed the best-performing countries, which parts of the world are still lacking when it comes to ER infrastructure? These are the five countries that scored the lowest on our index:
The lowest score on our rankings comes courtesy of Bangladesh, which has the third-lowest waiting time satisfaction rating in the world (28.73 out of 100). Its healthcare services are also poorly equipped to suit emergency demands, with less than one doctor (0.7), nurse (0.7), and hospital bed (0.9) per 1,000 people living in the country.
With a final score of 6.49 out of 100 on our index, it’s one of just three countries to receive a single-digit rating.
Morocco ranks ninth-slowest in medical procedures globally, according to our rankings, scoring 44.93 out of 100 for examination speed. It also scores just 33.71 out of 100 in terms of waiting time satisfaction.
Add a short-staffed workforce to that fact, with 0.7 doctors and 0.9 nurses and midwives per 1,000 people, and it’s no surprise that Morocco is the second-lowest rated country on our index overall, scoring 8.08.
For every 1,000 people in Egypt, the country offers just 1.1 hospital beds, 1.8 nurses and midwives, and 0.7 doctors per 1,000 people. These combine with low satisfaction ratings for waiting time (33.05 out of 100) and low examination speeds (46.32 out of 100) to make Egypt the country with the third weakest ER infrastructure worldwide, scoring 9.51 out of 100 in our overall index.
Following Egypt’s poor performance, Iraq scores just 11.92 out of 100 on our index. The country has just one doctor, 1.3 hospital beds, and 2.6 nurses and midwives per 1,000 residents. It also has the sixth-slowest examination speeds in the world, scoring 42.45 out of 100.
Finally, Algeria ranks as the fifth-weakest country for ER infrastructure worldwide, earning a final rating of just 12.42 out of 100 overall. Its poorly-staffed medical services contribute to this with just one doctor, 1.6 hospital beds, and 2.5 nurses and midwives per 1,000 people. While other countries come close to a spot in our bottom five, including Trinidad and Tobago (16.83) and Kenya (17.96), it’s Algeria that rounds out our list.
Sitting at #11 on our rankings, Australia appears to have relatively advanced ER infrastructure compared to the rest of the world, but it can still improve in certain areas.
The country does have high amounts of medical staff, with 13.5 nurses/midwives and 4.1 doctors per 1,000 residents, and its examination times are also relatively fast, with an average rating of 72.21 out of 100. However, its waiting time satisfaction leaves room for improvement (57.95 out of 100).
Alongside this, the average medical expenditure in Australia per capita is $10,163.81, making procedures relatively costly. Additionally, Australia’s satisfaction with waiting times from patients was in 22nd place, leaving plenty of room for improvement there.
Discussing Australia’s health system, Steven Spicer – Executive General Manager of Health, Life and Energy at Compare the Market – had this to say:
“Australia’s health system is one of the best in the world, but there has been an increasing strain on emergency rooms and the public system as Australia’s population grows and costs in the private system increase,” Mr Spicer said.
“Those with private health insurance have a greater choice of treatment for elective surgery, whereas emergency care usually happens at the closest public hospital. The advantage of private treatment with health insurance for elective surgeries is that you get to choose your doctor, access private rooms where available and avoid the public waiting list for treatment.
“Talk to your health insurance provider to find which doctors and hospitals they have agreements with, as this can reduce or minimise out-of-pocket expenses for covered treatment.”
This dataset explores which countries provide the strongest infrastructure for emergency room (ER) wait times, offering a comparative look at the performance of global healthcare systems in emergency care. The index focuses primarily on OECD member nations and selected additional countries where sufficient data is available.
Due to the absence of a single centralised global dataset on ER wait times, this analysis combines multiple credible indicators of healthcare capacity and responsiveness. The goal is to approximate the conditions that influence ER efficiency rather than measure exact wait times.
Supplementary analysis:
The index highlights countries with strong healthcare capacity and responsiveness, helping illustrate where patients are most likely to receive timely emergency care. While the data reflects available healthcare infrastructure and satisfaction indicators, it should be viewed as an indicative measure rather than a definitive ranking. This project brings together fragmented data sources to provide a more complete picture of emergency care performance worldwide.
The factors used were:
Weighting:
Each of the six indicators was normalised to a 0–1 scale and combined with equal weighting to produce a total score out of 100 for each country. Higher scores represent stronger healthcare capacity and faster service performance.
Indexing rules:
Sources:
Currency conversions:
USD to AUD – $1 = $1.51
USD to EUR – $1 = €0.86
Disclaimer:
This dataset was created for educational and comparative purposes. Due to the lack of a centralised and consistent global database on ER wait times, all results are approximate and based on proxy indicators of healthcare efficiency. Local reporting methods, definitions, and data collection standards vary between countries. The findings should not be interpreted as a definitive measure of actual ER wait times or healthcare system performance.