Utility and Costs During the Initial Year of 3D Printing in an Academic Hospital

Abstract

Objective: There is a paucity of utility and cost data regarding the launch of 3D printing in a hospital. The objective of this project is to benchmark utility and costs for radiology-based in-hospital 3D printing of anatomic models in a single, adult academic hospital.

Methods: All consecutive patients for whom 3D printed anatomic models were requested during the first year of operation were included. All 3D printing activities were documented by the 3D printing faculty and referring specialists. For patients who underwent a procedure informed by 3D printing, clinical utility was determined by the specialist who requested the model. A new metric for utility termed Anatomic Model Utility Points with range 0 (lowest utility) to 500 (highest utility) was derived from the specialist answers to Likert statements. Costs expressed in United States dollars were tallied from all 3D printing human resources and overhead. Total costs, focused costs, and outsourced costs were estimated. The specialist estimated the procedure room time saved from the 3D printed model. The time saved was converted to dollars using hospital procedure room costs.

Results: The 78 patients referred for 3D printed anatomic models included 11 clinical indications. For the 68 patients who had a procedure, the anatomic model utility points had an overall mean (SD) of 312 (57) per patient (range, 200-450 points). The total operation cost was $213,450. The total cost, focused costs, and outsourced costs were $2,737, $2,180, and $2,467 per model, respectively. Estimated procedure time saved had a mean (SD) of 29.9 (12.1) min (range, 0-60 min). The hospital procedure room cost per minute was $97 (theoretical $2,900 per patient saved with model).

Discussion: Utility and cost benchmarks for anatomic models 3D printed in a hospital can inform health care budgets. Realizing pecuniary benefit from the procedure time saved requires future research.

Keywords: 3D printing; Anatomic models; clinical utility; costs; operations.