From Prototype to Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study of a 3D Printing Pilot in Healthcare

Health systems face pressure to strengthen resilience against supply chain disruptions while maintaining cost-effective service delivery. This mixed-methods study describes a pilot project that integrated 3D printing services into a Canadian provincial health authority. Quantitative data were derived from internal clinical engineering work orders, where a scenario-based economic analysis compared original equipment manufacturer (OEM) procurement with modelled 3D-printed parts. Using conservative assumptions, selected non-electronic structural parts were assigned a fixed unit cost. Qualitative data were collected from two focus groups with clinical engineers and other end-users. Results from an exploratory scenario-based economic analysis suggest that substituting selected structurally simple clinical engineering parts with 3D-printed alternatives would be associated with modelled cost impacts ranging from a 67.4% net increase (OEM prices halved and 3D-printing costs doubled) to a 69.6% cost reduction (OEM prices increased by 10% and 3D-printing costs decreased by 20%). Demand changes affected absolute savings but not the percent difference (58.1% under ±50% quantity changes), and a pessimistic procurement scenario (OEM prices decreased by 30% and 3D-printing costs increased by 50%) reduced savings to 10.3%. Focus groups highlighted perceived benefits and implementation challenges associated with integrating additive manufacturing. Implementation was facilitated through an outsourcing model, which was perceived to shift certain responsibilities and risk-management functions to the vendor. Long-term adoption will require clearer communication and targeted education. This pilot study suggests that, under constrained regulatory scope and scenario-based assumptions, additive manufacturing may contribute to supply chain resilience and may be associated with modelled cost advantages for selected low-risk components.