Healthcare waiting lists: two years after the law was passed, only two regions are meeting the maximum waiting time limits

The 90 per cent figure is therefore the guarantee threshold set out in the 2019–21 National Plan for Local Healthcare Authorities (PNGLA) and also confirmed by the new 2026–28 PNGLA, approved in June 2026, for the regions’ full compliance with waiting times.

According to the analysis carried out by Salutequità, the regions which, in the first five months of 2026, are able to ensure compliance with the maximum waiting times for initial consultations with priority codes B, D and P in at least 90 per cent of cases are Basilicata (although no data is reported for priority class U – Urgent, 3 days) and the Marche. Veneto, on the other hand, manages to meet the target for priority codes B and P, whilst for class D it falls slightly short of the threshold. Lazio also comes close to the 90 per cent guarantee threshold for classes B and D (though it does not quite reach it), whilst it is fully compliant for class P. Puglia, the Autonomous Province of Trento, Umbria, Sicily, Sardinia, Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Abruzzo.

The target of ensuring that 90 per cent of cases meet waiting time standards is only comfortably met, on a national average, in the field of oncology (95.9 per cent). Dermatology and allergology (61.8%), ophthalmology (66.6 per cent) and urology (68.7 per cent) are lagging behind.

As regards diagnostic tests, the Basilicata Region (although no data is reported for priority class U) and the Veneto Region are fully compliant with the guarantee threshold. The situation is more critical, however, in Umbria, Sicily, Puglia, the Autonomous Province of Trento, Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Abruzzo.

In Italia, only 6,862,469 citizens – that is, 11.64 per cent – have their maximum waiting times, as laid down by law, respected.

A one-sided view

For a more comprehensive and informed analysis, these figures on compliance with waiting times, as shown on the Platform, should be considered in conjunction with other evidence.

Firstly, the platform monitors waiting times for just 55 specialist outpatient services (diagnostic tests and initial consultations) out of 2,108 – that is, 2.61 per cent – which is therefore a very small proportion of all the services guaranteed under the Essential Levels of Care (LEA). Consequently, even if the Regions were to comply, this would relate only to a very limited proportion of services, which is insufficient to provide a true picture of the Regions’ actual and full capacity to guarantee citizens’ right to receive all necessary treatment within a reasonable timeframe.

Secondly, some regions have a proportion of bookings in priority class P that is far higher than in others. This is the case in Basilicata, which, whilst meeting the targets for priority classes B, D and P – although no data is available for priority class U – has 85 per cent of bookings in priority class P, compared with 8.8 per cent in Emilia-Romagna and 7.8 per cent in Tuscany (Agenas data).

In conclusion, the data paint a picture of an Italia that is struggling greatly to guarantee its citizens’ right to timely access to healthcare, with significant differences between regions.

Whilst the National Platform on Waiting Lists represents a significant achievement and innovation in the governance of the National Health Service, there is still considerable scope for its further strengthening – particularly in terms of transparency and accountability – and this remains an absolute imperative for the system.

Firstly, the data contained in the Platform should identify and contribute to the institutional assessment of the Regions’ ability to guarantee Essential Levels of Care (LEAs), by supplementing the current New LEA Guarantee System (NSG) with a set of indicators; the NSG currently has only one ‘core’ indicator relating to waiting lists.

The platform should also be updated in real time. As things stand, it is still stuck at May 2026. The number of services being monitored is still too small compared to the entire Lea basket. There is no section providing citizens with a clear overview of which regions are guaranteeing maximum waiting times whilst complying with the statutory threshold of 90 per cent of cases.

There are no sections or data on the implementation and effectiveness of the protection measures for citizens (priority access) that can be activated when the regions are unable to meet the maximum waiting times.

There is also no section setting out the characteristics of the Regions’ service coverage areas, i.e. the geographical area within which maximum waiting times must be guaranteed, as well as their level of compliance with the national standard, namely ‘accessibility and proximity’. Finally, there is still no section dedicated to informing the public about how to protect their rights in the event that maximum waiting times are exceeded, nor about their obligations.

* Chair of Salutequità