ArticleBMJ global health2026
Cost-saving strategies for sustainable surgical care: a scoping review of efficiency models and potential approaches for low-income and middle-income countries.
Article in BMJ global health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile philanthropy, multilateral support and innovative internal funding approaches remain important to address surgical healthcare needs, there is increasing demand for efficiency models that maximise the impact of available resources. Cost-saving strategies are attractive to governments. We sought to answer the scoping review question: 'What are documented and transferable system-level cost-saving strategies in the provision of surgical healthcare services applicable in limited-resource settings?'
methodsThe scoping review was guided by the Arksey and O'Malley framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines; 642 studies were screened from PubMed, EMBASE, Global Index Medicus, Africa Journals Online and Google Scholar (2015-2024), without language or article type restrictions. Following title, abstract and full-text screening by 2 independent reviewers, we identified 63 records that met inclusion criteria: documented cost-saving strategies in surgical systems from community to national levels. Strategies were extracted into a theoretical framework adapted from the Procter and Gamble's cost optimisation model and the Triple Aim Framework using Jabareen's eight-step method.
resultsMost literature on cost savings for surgical healthcare was from high-income countries (81%), at national levels (48%), and focused on orthopaedic/cardiothoracic/vascular surgery. Most (25%) were retrospective observational studies or economic modelling (21%). We synthesised 125 distinct cost-saving strategies into 32 transferable strategies across five thematic areas, prioritised using a sustainability and scalability lens-preventative healthcare management (9%), surgical healthcare guidelines and pathways (31%), payment model transformation (19%), lean principles (25%) and technology adoption (16%). Strategies focused on governance, standardisation and process redesign were more likely to be sustainable and scalable with minimal resources, whereas interventions requiring coordinated delivery models or advanced digital infrastructure were more scale-dependent
conclusionsWe identified an integrated portfolio of contextualisable surgical cost-saving strategies that eliminate system waste, improve efficiency and result in savings. Policymakers and health system stakeholders in low-income and middle-income countries can use this structured evidence to prioritise, implement and scale cost-saving strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.