Today, patients from highly developed nations travel to other areas of the world for medical care, usually to find treatment at a lower cost. (Photo: Teri Virbickis/Shutterstock)

2013-11-13 | News Europe

In order to contribute towards a greater theoretical and empirical understanding of medical tourism developments worldwide, researchers from the University of York examined widely held assumptions regarding the size and shape of global medical travel, including the rise of medical tourism, enormous global market opportunities and the role that national governments play in stimulating the medical tourism industry.

Overall, they found that information and data about these three assumptions is largely supplied by health-care providers, brokers, and facilitators. “What data does exist is generally provided by stakeholders with a vested interest rather than by independent research institutions,” said Dr Neil Lunt, lead author from the university’s Social Policy and Social Work department. “What is clear is that there is no credible authoritative data at the global level, which is why we are urging caution to governments and other decision-makers who see medical tourism as a lucrative source of additional revenue.”

In their report, the researchers challenged the idea that a growing number of patients are prepared to travel across national borders for medical treatment. In addition, they argue that networks, history and cultural relations may be the driving force of medical tourism in certain countries. “The destinations of medical tourists are typically based on geopolitical factors, such as colonialism and existing trade patterns. For example, medical tourists from the Middle East typically go to Germany and the UK owing to existing ties, while Hungary attracts medical tourists from Western Europe owing to proximity,” explained Dr Daniel Horsfall, who performed the statistical analysis for the study.

The study, titled “Market size, market share and market strategy: Three myths of medical tourism”, was published online on 16 October in the Policy and Politics journal ahead of print. It was conducted in collaboration with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Royal Holloway, University of London; and the University of Birmingham.