The Burrow
Apr 13, 2026
The cost of healthcare is rising globally, even in countries with universal healthcare systems, and prescription affordability is an ongoing challenge. Paired with the cost of living, households are having to face decisions on what’s more important: a healthy body and mind, a heated home, or food on the table.
As health insurance comparison experts, Compare the Market are exploring how cost inflation and prescription demand challenges are impacting prescription affordability globally and how Australia compares.
Prescription costs are becoming less affordable almost everywhere, but some countries are experiencing much more rapid cost escalations despite strong public health systems.
We measured each country based on five key factors, including the percentage change in household pharmaceutical spending over the last five years and an affordability ratio that considers the share of income required to cover medicine costs.
Rising prescription costs and stagnant income levels demonstrate a widening inequality in access to essential medicines.
These countries saw the biggest spending rise in the past five years:
Even economically stable nations are not insulated from steep medication cost inflation.
Chile, Greece, and Korea had the highest affordability ratio, indicating a significant percentage of disposable income is allocated to healthcare spending. Chile also had a low public satisfaction with the cost of healthcare (44.49); the only countries less satisfied were Switzerland (43.66) and Ireland (43.13).
Poorer countries without universal healthcare systems push a larger portion of costs on families. When we measured how much families must pay of the national medicine bill, Mexico (20.2%) saw the highest burden, followed by Greece (12.8%) and Latvia (11.7%).
Out-of-pocket spend per capita in households was the highest globally in the USA at USD$461.70, with Australia not far behind at USD$387.50 and Korea at USD$379.20.
In larger countries like Australia, the overall changes don’t show the full picture, as prescription costs and healthcare spending differ dramatically by state.
However, Australia is in the top 10 countries with the worst prescription affordability, mirroring global trends of steep cost inflation and rising demand. With out-of-pocket cost per capita rising (5.34%), a high affordability ratio (0.94%), and a low public satisfaction, the nation is facing mounting pressure across its healthcare systems.
There’s a rising health demand across most of Australia, but that burden isn’t consistent across the states. There are structural healthcare differences across the Australian states, as some become more medicine-reliant than others.
When analysing the volume of prescriptions dispensed across the states, the Northern Territory saw a 45.7% increase over the last 10 years, higher than the 20% national average, suggesting an increase in chronic diseases and reliance on pharmaceutical intervention in the region.
Western Australia also shows a high demand growth at 31.1%, followed by Queensland with 27%.
The Australian Capital Territory is the only region with a substantial decline, dropping by 49.4% over the decade. This state has a high public health spending, creating more accessible medical care.
Over the past decade, each Australian state has seen varying degrees of demand pressure on pharmaceutical needs. Here’s a breakdown of how each state fared and what it means.
NT has seen the most aggressive growth of pressure across the board, with the highest in the nation cost growth (177%) and script volume (45.7%). NT is the most strained system, with rapidly growing cost and usage reflecting a heavy reliance on medicine and a weaker healthcare structure.
Despite a moderate volume growth (26.5%), QLD saw a 167% cost inflation over the last 10 years, which reflects how the pressures in this state come from costs rather than usage.
WA had a high volume (31.1%) and cost demand growth (140%), suggesting the pressures come primarily from the demand.
VIC tracks close to the national average with a 147% cost growth and a 24.9% increase in script volume over the previous decade.
Both NSW and SA sit in the middle of the pack with 136% cost growth in NSW and 133% growth in SA. Despite growth being lower than in other high-pressure states, the overall incline has a significant impact on the healthcare systems and the public.
TA saw slow growth compared to the mainland, with cost growth at 117% and a script volume of 24.1%.
ACT saw the lowest across the board with a cost growth of 22% and script volume of -49.4%. The low cost inflation, paired with a declining usage, means prescription affordability levels are lowest here.
While many categories have seen steady inflation, dermatological costs have skyrocketed in the last decade (+935.8%). Antiparasitic products (+378.8%) and genito-urinary/sex hormones (+244.9%) costs have also risen significantly, likely driven by the introduction of high-cost speciality treatments and an increase in diagnoses and demand.
Chronic conditions and high-demand medications rose by an average of 202.2% across respiratory, cancer, and immune therapies.
Dermatologicals may be rising the fastest in terms of percentage change, but the heaviest financial burden lies with high-cost specialty drugs.
Antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents have seen a 193.1% cost increase in the last 10 years. A life-saving drug for cancer and immune diseases that, while effective, is very expensive. Demand for cancer and immune-related drugs is growing fastest in New South Wales (+104%), Victoria (+103%), and Queensland (+100%).
Medication relating to nervous systems, such as mental health, pain, and epilepsy, remains a massive category for volume and total spend, which saw an 89.1% rise in the last decade. This reflects a growing mental health and chronic pain prevalence that is contributing to the healthcare system pressures.
Respiratory conditions like asthma and COPD have seen a sharp cost increase of 211.3%, suggesting either a rising level of these conditions or a shift towards expensive inhaler technologies.
Rising prescription costs underscore the importance of having the right health insurance policy. Medicines can be a steep out-of-pocket expense, and coverage for prescriptions varies widely between plans.
Steven Spicer, Executive General Manager of Health, Life and Energy at Compare the Market, says: “With prescription costs climbing, particularly in high-demand medications, selecting a health insurance extras plan with strong pharmaceutical benefits is one of the most effective ways for households to protect themselves from rising bills for medications that are not covered by Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).”
“Depending on your policy, you may be able to claim a portion of the cost of some eligible medications, which could help lower your out‑of‑pocket expenses. These plans also have a range of other benefits to improve your health in other areas as well.”
This dataset ranks countries based on the financial burden of accessing prescription medicines using five key factors. Each factor’s data was collected and normalised to a score between 0 and 1. These scores were then combined to give each country a total score out of 100, and countries were ranked from highest to lowest.
Additional Analysis: Australian-Specific Research
A separate analysis was carried out for Australia using PBS monthly reporting data. This allowed us to review national prescription trends, government expenditure on medicines, and patterns in high-volume prescriptions across Australian locations. This section is presented as supplementary insight, distinct from the global index, and reflects data sources unique to the Australian healthcare system.
The factors used were:
Factors were weighted as follows:
Indexing rules:
All data is accurate as of 28/11/2025 and comes from multiple sources including OECD Health Statistics and Numbeo. Rankings reflect these sources but may not capture every real-life detail. Countries included in the study were selected based on data availability across all required indicators. Countries with significant political sensitivities or incomplete datasets were removed where appropriate to maintain consistency and avoid skewing the results.
Additional sources: