Abstract
Background
According to the Ministry of Health in Cyprus, since 2009, every year more than 3.000 new incidents with neoplasm are diagnosed. The National Health System (NHS) of Cyprus aims to offer adequate health services, comparing them with European Union standards. However, it is lacking a Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET/CT) unit. The present study aims to examine whether an investment by the Cyprus NHS of a PET/CT unit can be financially sustainable.
Methods
A financial analysis of the operating revenues and expenses of a departmental PET/CT with F18-FDG was performed taking into consideration all related parameters. A detailed estimation of the unit's operation expenses (PET/CT unit supply, overheads, salaries, etc.) and incomes was produced for a 15-year period. This initial scenario was not financially viable and therefore two alternatives are also examined.
Results
After performing a detailed analysis and projection for the evaluation of the feasibility study in the initial scenario, the overall outcome is estimated negative deriving to a €2,2 million losses in the cumulative results by 2035. The second scenario concluded that the required number of incidents to reach a neutral cash flow after a 15-year period should increase from 8.971 to 23.430. The third scenario reached the conclusion that a parallel investment to the purchase of the PET/CT unit by installing a cyclotron unit in the Cypriot NHS provides cumulative results positive of €1,7 million for the PET/CT, in the same period, that can finance the largest part of the €2,5 million required for the installation of the cyclotron unit.
Conclusions
Our findings show that an investment of a sole PET/CT unit is not a financially viable. Alternative possibilities such as usage of a PET/CT operated by the private sector or supporting patients to travel to another country are within the economic terms recommended.
Key messages
From a financial viewpoint, the scenario of investing in a PET/CT unit by the Cyprus NHS is not viable. Examining alternative options for patients in need of a PET/CT unit, where the initial investment cost for the state is not financially viable.