3D Printing Applications in Healthcare Management: An Overview of Systematic Review on Clinical Efficacy and Operational Optimization
Abstract
Additive manufacturing, commonly known as 3D printing, has emerged as a transformative technology in healthcare management, enabling personalized medical devices, surgical planning, and operational efficiencies amid rising resource constraints, and this systematic review synthesizes secondary data to evaluate the clinical efficacy and operational optimization of 3D printing applications in clinical settings. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2017 and 2025; inclusion criteria encompassed studies assessing 3D-printed devices in healthcare management with outcomes related to clinical effectiveness (e.g., surgical accuracy, patient safety) and operational impacts (e.g., cost reduction, supply chain optimization), and data were thematically synthesized using PRISMA guidelines without primary data collection. Of 1,247 identified records, 28 studies met inclusion criteria, revealing that, based on syntheses from included systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 3D printing enhances clinical efficacy across disciplines such as orthopedics and cardiology, with reported reductions in operative times of 20–40% (from meta-analyses pooling multiple randomized controlled trials) and improvements in diagnostic precision of up to 25% (from systematic review syntheses), while also optimizing resource allocation with cost savings of 15–30% in device production (from cost-benefit analyses in scoping reviews) and streamlined hospital workflows through on-demand manufacturing, though regulatory hurdles and scalability issues persist, particularly in low-resource settings . Overall, 3D printing offers substantial potential for healthcare management by integrating clinical and operational benefits to foster sustainable models, and future research should prioritize standardized implementation frameworks to address equity gaps, providing policymakers and administrators with evidence-based insights to leverage additive manufacturing for improved patient outcomes and system resilience.
Keywords
Health Services Administration , Systematic review , Printing Three-Dimensional
References
- 1. Raechal L, Bajwa M, Fayyaz J, Biglino G, Kardong-Edgren S. A scoping review of literature about 3D printing: knowledge, skills and attitude for simulation educators in healthcare. 3D Print Med. 2025;11(1):46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-025- 00292-9.
- 2. Cong B, Zhang H. Innovative 3D printing technologies and advanced materials revolutionizing orthopedic surgery: current applications and future directions. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2025;13:1542179. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2025.1542179
- 3. Xie, Guanli, et al. The role of three-dimensional printing models in medical education: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Medical Education 25.1 (2025): 826. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909- 025-07187-7
- 4. Kermavnar, Tjaša, et al. "3D printing in palliative medicine: systematic review." BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care 14.e3 (2022): e2244-e2253. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003196
- 5. Jin Z, He C, Fu J, Han Q, He Y. Balancing the customization and standardization: exploration and layout surrounding the regulation of the growing field of 3D-printed medical devices in China. Biodes Manuf. 2022;5(3):580-606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42242-022-00187-2
- 6. Cronin, Una M., et al. "Healthcare professionals’ initial attitudes towards 3D printing and effects of a short educational briefing: A pre-post pilot study utilising the technology acceptance model: Attitudes towards 3D Printing in healthcare." Annals of 3D Printed Medicine (2025): 100205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stlm.2025.100205
- 7. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
- 8. Diment, L. E., Thompson, M. S., & Bergmann, J. H. (2017). Clinical efficacy and effectiveness of 3D printing: a systematic review. BMJ open, 7(12), e016891. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016891
- 9. Tack, Philip, et al. "3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: a systematic literature review." Biomedical engineering online 15.1 (2016): 115. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-016-0236-4
- 10. Popay, Jennie, et al. "Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews." A product from the ESRC methods programme Version 1.1 (2006): b92.