Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41673217›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2026

Health economic analysis of organizational models for breast cancer surgery: a bottom-up micro-costing and cost-minimization approach.

Johan Eriksson, Kaspar Walter Meili, Lena Lindholm, Micael Appelblad, Malin Sund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Johan ErikssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention/Surgery, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. johan.e.eriksson@umu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4653-2067
Kaspar Walter MeiliDepartment of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9889-4406
Lena LindholmHeart center, University Hospital of Norrland, Region Västerbotten, Umeå, Sweden.
Micael AppelbladDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8171-7227
Malin SundDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention/Surgery, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7516-9543

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare systems face challenges in optimizing resources while maintaining high-quality care. Breast cancer surgery represents a substantial share of elective surgery and provides an opportunity to evaluate different organizational models. This study presents a health economic analysis comparing two models for breast cancer surgery at the same hospital.

methodsA bottom-up micro-costing approach was employed to evaluate potential cost-savings of breast cancer surgeries performed at a general surgical department (GS) versus a cardiothoracic surgery department (CT). We analyzed 543 consecutive patients undergoing elective breast cancer surgery between January 2014 and September 2016. Resource use was identified through direct observation, hospital administrative systems, and operating room logs. Personnel, disposables, medications, and facility costs were quantified based on observed resource use within the study dataset; no external benchmarking was performed.

resultsCT was less expensive, with an average saving of 3,547 Swedish krona (SEK) per operation (95% CI: -674 to 7,510 SEK). Bootstrap analysis with 1,000 iterations showed CT was less costly in 96.2% of samples. Procedures were shorter at CT (170.8 vs. 221.3 min), enabling more operations per day (3.2 vs. 2.4). In our deterministic simulation, removing CT capacity increased waiting times by 15%, from 39 to 45.1 days, conditional on steady inflow and constant OR availability. Annual savings at the observed annual volume (~ 192 patients) were 681,104 SEK and could reach ~ 1.77 million SEK if volumes increased to 500 patients/year.

conclusionsThe CT organizational model was more likely to be less costly while maintaining shorter waiting times. These findings suggest that CT capacity may be prioritized, particularly at higher patient volumes, to support both economic efficiency and patient access.

Indexed as

Breast cancer surgeryCost-minimizationHealthcare resource allocationMicro-costingWaiting times

Identifiers

PMID41673217
PMCPMC12930689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.