Literature DB >> 10220180

Factors influencing choice of implants in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty: perspectives of surgeons and patients.

P F Sharkey1, V Sethuraman, W J Hozack, R H Rothman, J B Stiehl.   

Abstract

To determine the factors influencing surgeons' choice of implants for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), 650 surveys were mailed to all active members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons practicing in the United States; 364 surveys (56%) were completed and returned. Analysis revealed that the average number of total hip and total knee replacements performed by the respondents in 1997 was 81 and 97; there was substantial regional variation. The average number of hip implant and knee implant brands used by these surgeons in 1997 was 2.4 and 1.8. Anticipated improvement in clinical results and cost of components were the most frequently listed reasons for changing brands. Surgeons were also queried about cost reduction programs at their particular institution. The most frequently listed strategies for cost reduction of implants included surgeon cost-awareness programs and volume discounting. More than half of the respondents (53.5%) anticipate manufacturers to decrease the cost of implants in the next 2 years. Most of the respondents (93.7%) currently have the ability to choose a particular implant. About half (46.7%) anticipate losing some or all control of this decision in the next 3 years. These respondents foresee their hospitals requiring the use of a discounted implant in the future. An additional survey was completed by 102 consecutive patients scheduled either for primary THA (64) or primary TKA (38) at our institution. When asked about implant selection, 93.1% responded that their orthopaedic surgeon should choose the prosthesis; 5.9% responded that their physician in consultation with the patient should choose the prosthesis. When asked what should be the primary determinant of implant choice, cost or quality, the overwhelming majority (97.1%) chose quality. A small percentage (2.9%) chose cost and quality. No patient chose cost alone. A large number of patients (84.8%) responded that they would pay additional costs if their insurance companies or health maintenance organizations refused to pay for a better but more expensive implant. Most patients realized how expensive components are, and 51% of the respondents correctly estimated the cost of an implant. Orthopaedic surgeons perceive that they are losing control of implant choice in THA and TKA. Cost of implants is one of the most significant factors influencing which implant is chosen. Patients (the true payors), however, overwhelmingly want their surgeons to choose the implant used at surgery, and they want quality, not cost, to be the primary determinant of this decision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10220180     DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(99)90052-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  12 in total

1.  Do "premium" joint implants add value?: analysis of high cost joint implants in a community registry.

Authors:  Terence J Gioe; Amit Sharma; Penny Tatman; Susan Mehle
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Patient willingness to contribute to the cost of novel implants in total joint arthroplasty: the Canadian experience

Authors:  Ariel Fuhrmann; Ron Batash; Ran Schwarzkopf; David Backstein
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 3.  Bundled Payments in Total Joint Replacement: Keeping Our Care Affordable and High in Quality.

Authors:  Alexander S McLawhorn; Leonard T Buller
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-09

Review 4.  Preceding the procedure: medical devices and shared decision making.

Authors:  Julian J Prokopetz; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina; Thomas S Thornhill; John Wright; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.794

5.  Cumulative revision rate is higher in metal-on-metal THA than metal-on-polyethylene THA: analysis of survival in a community registry.

Authors:  Der-Chen T Huang; Penny Tatman; Susan Mehle; Terence J Gioe
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Cost effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty from a health care providers' perspective before and after introduction of an interdisciplinary clinical pathway--is investment always improvement?

Authors:  Frank Krummenauer; Klaus-Peter Guenther; Stephan Kirschner
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Patient risk taking and spending habits correlate with willingness to pay for novel total joint arthroplasty implants.

Authors:  Ran Schwarzkopf; Timothy L Kahn
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2015-03-20

8.  EVALUATION OF THE KNOWLEDGE ON COST OF ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANTS AMONG ORTHOPEDIC SURGEONS.

Authors:  Gustavo Gonçalves Arliani; Rodrigo Guerra Sabongi; Alysson Ferreira Batista; Diego Costa Astur; Guilherme Guadagnini Falotico; Moises Cohen
Journal:  Acta Ortop Bras       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 0.513

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

Authors:  Lawton R Burns; Michael G Housman; Robert E Booth; Aaron M Koenig
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2018-01-11

10.  Application of quality by design for 3D printed bone prostheses and scaffolds.

Authors:  Daniel Martinez-Marquez; Ali Mirnajafizadeh; Christopher P Carty; Rodney A Stewart
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.