Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?

Lawton R Burns,1 Michael G Housman,2 Robert E Booth,3 Aaron M Koenig4 1Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 2Singularity University, Moffett Field, CA, 33B Orthopaedics, Langhorne, PA, 4Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General H...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Burns LR, Housman MG, Booth RE, Koenig AM
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:	physician preference surgeons orthopedics hip implants Medical technology R855-855.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/0c68dad7e5e34e3d8904166de4055c2a
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:0c68dad7e5e34e3d8904166de4055c2a
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:0c68dad7e5e34e3d8904166de4055c2a2021-12-02T05:03:42ZPhysician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?1179-1470https://doaj.org/article/0c68dad7e5e34e3d8904166de4055c2a2018-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/physician-preference-items-what-factors-matter-to-surgeons-does-the-ve-peer-reviewed-article-MDERhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1470Lawton R Burns,1 Michael G Housman,2 Robert E Booth,3 Aaron M Koenig4 1Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 2Singularity University, Moffett Field, CA, 33B Orthopaedics, Langhorne, PA, 4Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Wang Ambulatory Care Center, Boston, MA, USA Background: The USA devotes roughly $200 billion (6%) of annual national health expenditures to medical devices. A substantial proportion of this spending occurs during orthopedic (eg, hip and knee) arthroplasties – two high-volume hospital procedures. The implants used in these procedures are commonly known as physician preference items (PPIs), reflecting the physician’s choice of implant and vendor used. The foundations for this preference are not entirely clear. This study examines what implant and vendor characteristics, as evaluated by orthopedic surgeons, are associated with their preference. It also examines other factors (eg, financial relationships and vendor tenure) that may contribute to implant preference. Methods: We surveyed all practicing orthopedic surgeons performing 12 or more implant procedures annually in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The survey identified each surgeon’s preferred hip/knee vendor as well as the factors that surgeons state they use in selecting that primary vendor. We compared the surgeons’ evaluation of multiple characteristics of implants and vendors using analysis of variance techniques, controlling for surgeon characteristics, hospital characteristics, and surgeon–vendor ties that might influence these evaluations. Results: Physician’s preference is heavily influenced by technology/implant factors and sales/service factors. Other considerations such as vendor reputation, financial relationships with the vendor, and implant cost seem less important. These findings hold regardless of implant type (hip vs knee) and specific vendor. Conclusion: Our results suggest that there is a great deal of consistency in the factors that surgeons state they use to evaluate PPIs such as hip and knee implants. The findings offer an empirically derived definition of PPIs that is consistent with the product and nonproduct strategies pursued by medical device companies. PPIs are products that surgeons rate favorably on the twin dimensions of technology and sales/service. Keywords: physician’s preference, surgeons, orthopedics, hip implants, PPIsBurns LRHousman MGBooth REKoenig AMDove Medical Pressarticlephysician preferencesurgeonsorthopedicship implantsMedical technologyR855-855.5ENMedical Devices: Evidence and Research, Vol Volume 11, Pp 39-49 (2018)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	physician preference surgeons orthopedics hip implants Medical technology R855-855.5
spellingShingle	physician preference surgeons orthopedics hip implants Medical technology R855-855.5 Burns LR Housman MG Booth RE Koenig AM Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
description	Lawton R Burns,1 Michael G Housman,2 Robert E Booth,3 Aaron M Koenig4 1Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 2Singularity University, Moffett Field, CA, 33B Orthopaedics, Langhorne, PA, 4Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Wang Ambulatory Care Center, Boston, MA, USA Background: The USA devotes roughly $200 billion (6%) of annual national health expenditures to medical devices. A substantial proportion of this spending occurs during orthopedic (eg, hip and knee) arthroplasties – two high-volume hospital procedures. The implants used in these procedures are commonly known as physician preference items (PPIs), reflecting the physician’s choice of implant and vendor used. The foundations for this preference are not entirely clear. This study examines what implant and vendor characteristics, as evaluated by orthopedic surgeons, are associated with their preference. It also examines other factors (eg, financial relationships and vendor tenure) that may contribute to implant preference. Methods: We surveyed all practicing orthopedic surgeons performing 12 or more implant procedures annually in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The survey identified each surgeon’s preferred hip/knee vendor as well as the factors that surgeons state they use in selecting that primary vendor. We compared the surgeons’ evaluation of multiple characteristics of implants and vendors using analysis of variance techniques, controlling for surgeon characteristics, hospital characteristics, and surgeon–vendor ties that might influence these evaluations. Results: Physician’s preference is heavily influenced by technology/implant factors and sales/service factors. Other considerations such as vendor reputation, financial relationships with the vendor, and implant cost seem less important. These findings hold regardless of implant type (hip vs knee) and specific vendor. Conclusion: Our results suggest that there is a great deal of consistency in the factors that surgeons state they use to evaluate PPIs such as hip and knee implants. The findings offer an empirically derived definition of PPIs that is consistent with the product and nonproduct strategies pursued by medical device companies. PPIs are products that surgeons rate favorably on the twin dimensions of technology and sales/service. Keywords: physician’s preference, surgeons, orthopedics, hip implants, PPIs
format	article
author	Burns LR Housman MG Booth RE Koenig AM
author_facet	Burns LR Housman MG Booth RE Koenig AM
author_sort	Burns LR
title	Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
title_short	Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
title_full	Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
title_fullStr	Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
title_full_unstemmed	Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
title_sort	physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? does the vendor matter?
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2018
url	https://doaj.org/article/0c68dad7e5e34e3d8904166de4055c2a
work_keys_str_mv	AT burnslr physicianpreferenceitemswhatfactorsmattertosurgeonsdoesthevendormatter AT housmanmg physicianpreferenceitemswhatfactorsmattertosurgeonsdoesthevendormatter AT boothre physicianpreferenceitemswhatfactorsmattertosurgeonsdoesthevendormatter AT koenigam physicianpreferenceitemswhatfactorsmattertosurgeonsdoesthevendormatter
_version_	1718400632209014784

Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?

Ejemplares similares