Simulation–Optimization of Hospital Capacity and Chronic Care Pathways under Demographic Shift: A Multi-Objective, Equity-Constrained and Spatially-Aware Framework

In an era marked by aging populations, increasing chronic disease rates, and ongoing disparities in health services access, healthcare systems across the globe are facing a series of challenges. Healthcare systems around the world are increasingly grappling with a combination of factors, including an aging population, a growing burden of chronic diseases, and persistent inequities in health services access. Current hospital capacity planning models consider demand as constant, only indirectly include equity, and separate simulation from optimization, resulting in sub-optimal and inequitable recommendations. This paper proposes a new integrated simulation-optimization approach that combines stratified discrete event simulation (DES) with a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (NSGA-II) with explicit equity constraints, which are based on needs, and with spatial access variations. The model framework represents the dynamic demographic demand, Markov chain chronic disease progression (with type 2 diabetes mellitus as the example disease), and travel times by zone in eight geographic zones. The need-weighted absolute wait time deviation is a formal equity metric that is directly used in the optimization loop and is thus treated as a Pareto objective for healthcare capacity planning for the first time, to the best of our knowledge. By applying a semi-synthetic analysis of 500,000 people in a region, Pareto frontier analysis shows that equity constraints reduce the total cost of the system by 9-14% when incorporating accelerated ageing, and targeted telehealth expansion can lower inequity by more than 23% without increasing cost by more than 8%. Equity-neutral optimization is found to be inequitable and to cause up to a 35% increase in wait times for low-socioeconomic status (SES) populations compared with high-SES populations, supporting the need for explicit fairness constraints. The framework is scalable: It takes about 4.9 hours of wall-clock time for 1,000 Pareto evaluations across 20 parallel cores, and generates actionable insights for resilient, fair, evidence-based design of health systems.

Simulation–Optimisation; Hospital Capacity Planning

1. Agardh, E., Allebeck, P., Hallqvist, J., Moradi, T., & Sidorchuk, A. (2011). Type 2 diabetes incidence and socio-economic position: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Epidemiology, 40(3), 804–818. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Asada, Y. (2013). A summary measure of health inequalities for a pay-for-population-health-performance system. Preventing Chronic Disease, 10, E168. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Brailsford, S. C., Bolt, T., Connell, C., Klein, J. H., & Patel, B. (2009). Stakeholder engagement in health care simulation. Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference, 1840–1849. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182–197. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Fu, M. C. (2015). Handbook of simulation optimization. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Gunal, M. M., & Pidd, M. (2010). Discrete event simulation for performance modelling in health care: a review of the literature. Journal of Simulation, 4(1), 42–51. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. NICE. (2022). Type 2 diabetes in adults: management (NG28). National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. (1998). Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). The Lancet, 352(9131), 837–853. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. ACCORD Study Group. (2008). Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine, 358(24), 2545–2559. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Whitehead, M. (1992). The concepts and principles of equity and health. International Journal of Health Services, 22(3), 429–445. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Humphreys, P., Spratt, B., Tariverdi, M., Burdett, R. L., Cook, D., Yarlagadda, P. K. D. V., & Corry, P. (2022). An overview of hospital capacity planning and optimisation. Healthcare, 10(5), 826. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050826 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Burdett, R. L., Corry, P., Spratt, B., Cook, D., & Yarlagadda, P. (2023). A stochastic programming approach to perform hospital capacity assessments. PLOS ONE, 18(11), e0287980. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287980 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Li, Z., Serban, N., & Swann, J. L. (2015). An optimization framework for measuring spatial access over healthcare networks. BMC Health Services Research, 15, 273. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0919-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Wang, Q., Weng, L., Li, J., & Shi, L. (2026). An analysis and optimization model for healthcare equity of medical resources allocation in an aging community. BMC Health Services Research, 26, 239. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-026-14068-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Balsa-Barreiro, J., Batista, S. F. A., Hannoun, G. J., & Menendez, M. (2025). Travel-time accessibility and adaptive spatial planning solutions for the healthcare system. npj Health Systems, 2, 24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44401-025-00028-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Khalili, G., Zargoush, M., & Huang, K. (2025). Optimal capacity planning for long-term care facilities considering patients’ gender, language, and age group. Health Care Management Science, 28, 715–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-025-09717-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Deglise-Hawkinson, J., Helm, J. E., Huschka, T., Kaufman, D. L., & Van Oyen, M. P. (2018). A capacity allocation planning model for integrated care and access management. Production and Operations Management, 27(12), 2272–2294. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12941 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Zhang, X., Tao, Z., & Li, Q. (2021). Gaining from rational health planning: Spatial reallocation of top-tier general hospital beds in China. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 157, 107344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107344 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Guagliardo, M. F. (2020). Spatial accessibility of primary care: Concepts, methods and challenges. International Journal of Health Geographics, 19(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-020-00236-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Delamater, P. L., Messina, J. P., Shortridge, A. M., & Grady, S. C. (2021). Measuring geographic access to health care: Raster and network-based methods. International Journal of Health Geographics, 20(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-021-00272-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Asghari, S., Najafabadi, M. M., & Khosravi, A. (2023). Multi-objective optimization approaches in healthcare systems: A systematic review. Operations Research for Health Care, 37, 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orhc.2023.100377 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ahmadi-Javid, A., Seyedi, P., & Syam, S. S. (2017). A survey of healthcare facility location. Computers & Operations Research, 79, 223–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2016.05.018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Cinaroglu, S. (2022). Healthcare simulation modeling for chronic disease management: A systematic review. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 119, 102579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102579 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. World Health Organization. (2024). Ageing and health. Geneva: WHO. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. World Health Organization. (2024). Noncommunicable diseases. Geneva: WHO. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. WHO. (2022). Ageing and health. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. WHO. (2023). Noncommunicable diseases. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• IFRS S1 and S2: A Global and Indian Perspective with Implications for Auditors
• A Study on Consumer Attitudes and Buying Behavior towards organic Food Products
• India’s Transfer Pricing Framework: Evolution, Challenges, and Future Directions
• Application of Statistical Methods in Business Administration: A Quantitative Study on Organizational Performance
• Decoding Fintech Adoption: The Role of Trust, Risks and Perceived Benefits