Evaluation of the Knowledge on Cost of Orthopedic Implants Among Orthopedic Surgeons

Abstract

Objective: To determine the knowledge of Brazilian Orthopedic Surgeons on the costs of orthopedic surgical devices used in surgical implants. Methods: A questionnaire was applied to Brazilian Orthopedic Surgeons during the 46th Brazilian Congress on Orthopedics and Traumatology. Results: Two hundred and one Orthopedic Surgeons completely filled out the questionnaire. The difference between the average prices estimated by the surgeons and the average prices provided by the supplier companies was 47.1%. No differences were found between the orthopedic specialists and other subspecialties on the prices indicated for specific orthopedic implants. However, differences were found among orthopedic surgeons who received visits from representatives of implant companies and those who did not receive those visits on prices indicated for shaver and radiofrequency device. Correlation was found between length of orthopedic experience and prices indicated for shaver and interference screw, and higher the experience time the lower the price indicated by Surgeons for these materials. Conclusion: The knowledge of Brazilian Orthopedic Surgeons on the costs of orthopedic implants is precarious. Reduction of cost of orthopedics materials depends on a more effective communication and interaction between doctors, hospitals and supplier companies with solid orientation programs and awareness for physicians about their importance in this scenario.Level of Evidence III, Cross-Sectional Study.

Orthopedic injuries in a tertiary hospital: an epidemiological and economic analysis of the implants used

“…Recently, Payne et al (2015) have shown the economic importance of the implants wasted in the scenario of orthopedic surgeries, however, there are few studies that analyze the cost-benefit ratio or the cost related to the implant for these types of fractures. In addition, little knowledge on the cost related to the implant by the orthopedic surgeon is precarious (Okike et al, 2014;Arliani et al, 2016) and minimized by the public healthcare administrators themselves (Albersheim et al, 2020).…”

Antimicrobial Imidazolium Ionic Liquids for the Development of Minimal Invasive Calcium Phosphate-Based Bionanocomposites

“…Herein, the CaP bionanocomposites with IL that contain longer N -alkyl chain lengths showed both important antibacterial and antifungal properties, inhibiting biofilm development. Tests with different strains of fungi and bacteria revealed that the IL maintained predominantly their already reported antimicrobial properties after incorporation in the CaP gels, showing the best results with C 16 MImCl and (C 10 ) 2 MImCl . This behavior indicates that the ILs were probably not altered by the CaP gel, retaining their original properties and consequently their cytotoxicity against the tested microorganisms.…”

“…Innovation in the orthopedic material sector can solve this issue, even if these new procedures cause an increase in healthcare costs. 4 As such, biomaterials with suitable osteogenic and antibacterial features are of utmost importance to reduce the risk of an implant failure. Several approaches have been attempted to design new biomaterials functionalized with antibacterial/microbial and osteoinductive agents.…”

“…Pain is an important consequence of inflammation and infection induced by body–implant surface interaction. Innovation in the orthopedic material sector can solve this issue, even if these new procedures cause an increase in healthcare costs . As such, biomaterials with suitable osteogenic and antibacterial features are of utmost importance to reduce the risk of an implant failure.…”

Prospect of Metal Ceramic (Titanium-Wollastonite) Composite as Permanent Bone Implants: A Narrative Review

“…On average, this represented 32.7% of the total hospital cost using the statistics of 52 patients [ 164 ]. This is further supported by the shift in healthcare costs on orthopaedic surgical procedures as a fixed payment system may close the gap between the cost of the implant and the rising costs of healthcare [ 165 , 166 ].…”