↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

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

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#2 of 314)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
65 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Physician preference items: what factors matter to surgeons? Does the vendor matter?
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, January 2018
DOI 10.2147/mder.s151647
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lawton R Burns, Michael G Housman, Robert E Booth, Aaron M Koenig

Abstract

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. 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. 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. 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 18 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 20%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 12%
Engineering 2 5%
Unspecified 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 21 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 483. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2023.
All research outputs
#55,041
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#2
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,282
of 450,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,092 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them