Orthopedic device sales involve the sale of medical devices across the medical department. This sale involves devices such as the plaster of Paris or any other technological equipment used in this field. Over the years, medical device innovation has been noted to slow down where product categories have become more crowded with similar products. Medical physicians on the other hand are more willing to accept medical devices offered at the lowest price as long as it meets quality standards. This combination of trends has been highly noted the portions of the medical device market that generate the largest profit. These include the CRM devices; spine related devices as well as orthopedic devices. This change in the doctor’s behavior is so significant that the marketplace is at a tipping point that will force medical device (Dorsey, 2004).
The first question asks, what about our brand name? This question relates to the way hospitals and physicians are trying to control the inventory. This shows that hospitals are not evolving at the same rate and what matters to the physicians is the buying decisions that vary from a traditional physician driven account that is more clinically driven, to accounts where the administrators are the key players in the purchasing decision. Therefore, the brand name is no longer taken seriously by the physicians as they will purchase and making the purchasing decisions depending on the products that is cheaper and convenient (Dorsey, 2004). If the products are not within the approved list of the physicians, the brand will not be considered. The brand name does not matter anymore because there are companies that have emerged in the market that offer similar products with a cheaper price and offer better convenience in terms of profit making. Therefore the brand name is not considered as a determining factor anymore (Long, 2008).
The second question is, the money and time spent in the operating room with the doctors, is it all for nothing? Well, to some extent it might all be for nothing if at all their decisions are not considered. Physicians decide whether the patient is to receive a device and if so, which device and from which manufacturer. This means that they are not concerned with the economic effects of the choices they make. Therefore, regardless of the time and money spent with the physicians, their decisions are more upheld than those of the administrators due to the fact that they are the people who give the recommendations on the patients. Surgeons and other physicians give the final say on the devices that should be bought within the hospital (Capozzi and Delsignore, 2004). What they do not consider is that the hospital’s profits from each patient’s case depend on whether the surgeon selects a basic or improved device, whether it was obtained from vendors with which the hospital was able to negotiate low prices and whether the device is covered by the contract or rather is considered a novel technology that must be reimbursed at the high list price.
The last question is, how do we get control of this situation? According to Long 2008, the only way that may elevate the situation is that the hospital administrators should be trained on how to operate the devices in order to know how they function. This will enable them to understand the functionality and importance of the devices and maybe they would help during the purchase by giving their input on which device is better and efficient (Long, 2008). This would also grant them some authority in the purchasing decision and help during the actual purchase.
References
Capozzi, J. D. and Delsignore, J.L. (2004). Reimbursement Incentives to Physicians. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume, 86 (4), 876-877.
Dorsey, P., & Mansueto, J. (2004). The Five Rules for Successful Stock Investing: Morningstar's Guide to Building Wealth and Winning in the Market. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Long, P.H. (2008). Medical Devices in Orthopedic Applications. Toxicologic Pathology, 36 (1), 86-91.
