At what point did selling orthopedic products stop being about clinical value and patient outcomes—transforming entirely into a game of wrangling access, locking down contracts, and navigating the bureaucratic maze of Value Analysis Committees?
Read the best 8 answers from my LinkedIn posting of this question.
1/ When achieving quota became the priority placing shareholders before patients. (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/chuck-raggio-pe-10383229/)
2/ Two spots in time… When hospitals merged and became health systems and when surgeons (roughly 2 in 3) sold their practices to these health systems. (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-copeland-50712b4/)
3/ And finally when reps started confusing customer service for sales Tiger Buford (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-copeland-50712b4/)
4/ It’s also because ASCs flat out say “we need this kind of price because of our lower reimbursement” and if you give it to them, they let you in. So companies do it and start doing cases. It’s collaborative still, for the most part. (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-copeland-50712b4/)
5/ Hospitals don’t do that anymore. You give it to them and they STILL don’t let you in. They actually ignore you for the most part.
When surgeons got threatened to be fired because most, if not many health systems employ the surgeons directly and/or threaten to take away their hospital privileges if they don’t comply (by using the implants the health system wants them to use).
It’s a shame that the vast majority of the American public has no idea that the majority of their healthcare is decided by supply chain managers that do not have “MD” behind their names..
Most often, patients receive cheapest options decided by corporate contract managers that force surgeons to use implants that are not the “latest and greatest” and often have inadequate options, little or no formal surgeon training or experience with positive outcomes.
It’s time for politicians to step up and legislate for patients rights. Corporations and materials management should no longer get to decide what goes into a patient!!!
The worst part is that no surgical implant company will stand up to the healthcare corporations for fear of being banned from that system; so everyone stays quiet 🤐
I urge all patients to start inquiring, but beware, it puts the surgeon in a tough spot if they have to tell you they can only use what implant are contracted by the health system. CPOM (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/rosenthallee/)
6/ When working in a system that seeks equal care and where the differential in technology barely adds very little to the benefit sought in medical care, it is the cost benefit that should prevail when choosing a provider of orthopedic systems, it is just maximaxing value. (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/jairo-gomez-56b3082b/)
7/ I had 5 surgeons request a new technology product at a facility in Sacramento and the admin said I needed to present it to Green security, an outside gate keeper, who immediately declined it with this response.
We already have a product in that category.
Can you image that 20 years ago if someone brought in a knotless anchor with suture passer and these clowns said we already have one. Open procedures would still be the gold standard. There are 20 examples of this.
New technology and improved procedures are what surgeons design to drive to the cutting edge and continue to improve patient outcomes. Today’s technology is tomorrow’s commodity in sports medicine procedures and these gait keepers as well as VAC committee bureaucracy bring advancements to a halt. (from https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-mcpherson-058155142/)
8/ In Today’s Healthcare Supply Chain, Commoditization Often Results in a Decline in Both Quality and Innovation, Leading To a State of Mediocrity. (LinkedIN article)