The Effect of Price on Surgeons' Choice of Implants: A Randomized Controlled Survey

PURPOSE

Surgical costs are under scrutiny and surgeons are being held increasingly responsible for cost containment. In some instances, implants are the largest component of total procedure cost, yet previous studies reveal that surgeons' knowledge of implant prices is poor. Our study aims to (1) understand drivers behind implant selection and (2) assess whether educating surgeons about implant costs affects implant selection.

METHODS

We surveyed 226 orthopedic surgeons across 6 continents. The survey presented 8 clinical cases of upper extremity fractures with history, radiographs, and implant options. Surgeons were randomized to receive either a version with each implant's average selling price ("price-aware" group), or a version without prices ("price-naïve" group). Surgeons selected a surgical implant and ranked factors affecting implant choice. Descriptive statistics and univariate, multivariable, and subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

For cases offering implants within the same class (eg, volar locking plates), price-awareness reduced implant cost by 9% to 11%. When offered different models of distal radius volar locking plates, 25% of price-naïve surgeons selected the most expensive plate compared with only 7% of price-aware surgeons. For cases offering different classes of implants (eg, plate vs external fixator), there was no difference in implant choice between price-aware and price-naïve surgeons. Familiarity with the implant was the most common reason for choosing an implant in both groups (35% vs 46%). Price-aware surgeons were more likely to rank cost as a factor (29% vs 21%).

CONCLUSIONS

Price awareness significantly influences surgeons' choice of a specific model within the same implant class. Merely including prices with a list of implants leads surgeons to select less expensive implants. This implies that an untapped opportunity exists to reduce surgical expenditures simply by enhancing surgeons' cost awareness.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic/Decision Analyses I.

Trigger finger: assessment of surgeon and patient preferences and priorities for decision making

PURPOSE

To test the null hypothesis that there are no differences in the priorities and preferences of patients with idiopathic trigger finger (TF) and hand surgeons.

METHODS

One hundred five hand surgeons of the Science of Variation Group and 84 patients with TF completed a survey about their priorities and preferences in decision making regarding the management of TF. The questionnaire was structured according the Ottawa Decision Support Framework for the development of a decision aid.

RESULTS

Patients desired orthotics more and surgery less than physicians. Patients and physicians disagreed on the main advantage of several treatment options for TFs and on disadvantages of the treatment options. Patients preferred to decide for themselves after receiving advice, whereas physicians preferred a shared decision. Patients preferred booklets, and physicians opted for Internet and video decision aids.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing patients and hand surgeons, there were some differences in treatment preferences and perceived advantages and disadvantages regarding idiopathic TF-differences that might be addressed by a decision aid.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Information that helps inform patients of their options based on current best evidence might help them understand their own preferences and values, reduce decisional conflict, limit surgeon-to-surgeon variations, and improve health.

The minimum number of muscles to control a chain of joints with and without tenodeses, arthrodeses, or braces--application to the human finger

While the underlying principles of controlling a single joint have been well described, the principles of simultaneously controlling multiple joints have not been comprehensively addressed in the literature of reconstructive hand surgery. This article analyzes (1) how many muscles are minimally required to fully control a chain of joints with in total N Degrees of Freedom (DoF), and (2) to what degree tenodeses, arthrodeses or braces can reduce the required number of muscles. It is demonstrated by mathematical analysis and illustrated by examples that the minimal number of muscles to control a chain of N DoF is N + 1. The number of muscles required for control can be reduced by mechanisms that reduce the number of DoF in the chain. (i) An arthrodesis is a permanent surgical fixation of a joint. An arthrodesis eliminates as many DoF in the chain as the arthrodized joints contributed. (ii) Tenodeses are coordinative tendon constructions. Each independent tenodesis eliminates one DoF from the chain. (iii) Braces are removable external supports. They eliminate as many DoF for muscle control as they immobilize. These principles are applied to illustrate the fundamental importance of tendinous structures in control in the human finger. Being able to determine the minimum number of muscles needed for multiarticular control gives additional knowledge in the design of functional reconstruction.