Industry Payments to Foot and Ankle Surgeons and Their Effect on Total Ankle Arthroplasty Outcomes

An In-Depth Analysis of Public and Private Research Funding in Orthopaedic Surgery from 2015 to 2021

BACKGROUND

Understanding the trends and patterns of research funding can aid in enhancing growth and innovation in orthopaedic research. We sought to analyze financial trends in public orthopaedic surgery funding and characterize trends in private funding distribution among orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals to explore potential disparities across orthopaedic subspecialties.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of private and public orthopaedic research funding from 2015 to 2021 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, respectively. Institutions receiving funds from both the NIH and the private sector were classified separately as publicly funded and privately funded. Research payment characteristics were categorized according to their respective orthopaedic fellowship subspecialties. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Mann-Kendall tests were employed. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Over the study period, $348,428,969 in private and $701,078,031 in public research payments were reported. There were 2,229 unique surgeons receiving funding at 906 different institutions. The data showed that a total of 2,154 male orthopaedic surgeons received $342,939,782 and 75 female orthopaedic surgeons received $5,489,187 from 198 different private entities. The difference in the median payment size between male and female orthopaedic surgeons was not significant. The top 1% of all practicing orthopaedic surgeons received 99% of all private funding in 2021. The top 20 publicly and top 20 privately funded institutions received 77% of the public and 37% of the private funding, respectively. Private funding was greatest (31.5%) for projects exploring adult reconstruction.

CONCLUSION

While the amount of public research funding was more than double the amount of private research funding, the distribution of public research funding was concentrated in fewer institutions when compared with private research funding. This suggests the formation of orthopaedic centers of excellence (CoEs), which are programs that have high concentrations of talent and resources. Furthermore, the similar median payment by gender is indicative of equitable payment size. In the future, orthopaedic funding should follow a distribution model that aligns with the existing approach, giving priority to a nondiscriminatory stance regarding gender, and allocate funds toward CoEs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Securing research funding is vital for driving innovation in orthopaedic surgery, which is crucial for enhancing clinical interventions. Thus, understanding the patterns and distribution of research funding can help orthopaedic surgeons tailor their future projects to better align with current funding trends, thereby increasing the likelihood of securing support for their work.

Industry Payments to Foot and Ankle-Trained Orthopedic Surgeons: An Analysis of the Open Payments Database From 2014 to 2019

Introduction The authors examined if the transparency in industry payments to foot and ankle-trained orthopedic surgeons resulted in the following changes to the (1) median general payments to surgeons, (2) trend in median payments to surgeons across all subcategory payments, and (3) trend in median payments to surgeons in 11 regions of the United States. Methods A retrospective review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Open Payments Database (OPD) was performed to identify all industry payments made by drug and medical device companies to orthopedic surgeons (N = 3,835) between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and trend analyses in annual payments, number of payments to surgeons per year, payment subtypes, and regional distributions were analyzed. Results A total of 53,280 payments totaling $53,454,850.56 were made to orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons between 2014 and 2019. Mean and median payments were $1,003.28 and $60.19, respectively. Statistically significant differences in mean payment amounts were observed by year (p = 0.001) with a highly statistically significant, strong increase in the number of payments made over the six-year period (r = 0.97, p < 0.001). The greatest increases in median individual payments were observed for gifts (277.1%; r = 0.18, p = 0.05), education (250.6%; r = 0.17, p < 0.001), and royalties and licensing (72.1%; r = 0.05, p = 0.04). Statistically significant increasing trends in median payments over time were observed for the Northeast (p < 0.001) and South regions (p < 0.001). Discussion The results of this study demonstrate the increase in payments made across the six-year time period. The study demonstrates that there is a shift in the type of payments from speaker fees, entertainment, and lodging to education, gifts, honoraria, royalties, and consulting. Conclusion Since the OPD release, no significant decrease was identified in the financial relationship between foot and ankle surgeons and the industry; rather, an increase was observed. This increase in education, royalties, and consulting shows that more foot and ankle surgeons are getting involved in the industry, contrary to expectations. The partnership between industry and physicians can help to improve innovation and bring new ideas to the future of orthopedics.

Costs and Outcomes of Total Joint Arthroplasty in Medicare Beneficiaries Are Not Meaningfully Associated with Industry Payments

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated that industry payments affect physician prescribing patterns, but their effect on orthopaedic surgical costs is unknown. This study examines the relationship between industry payments and the total costs of primary total joint arthroplasty, as well as operating room cost, length of stay, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission.

METHODS

Open Payments data were matched across a 20% sample of Medicare-insured patients undergoing primary elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) (n = 130,872) performed by 7,539 surgeons or primary elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) (n = 230,856) performed by 8,977 surgeons from 2013 to 2015. Patient, hospital, and surgeon-specific factors were gathered. Total and operating room costs, length of stay, mortality, and readmissions were recorded. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were used to identify the risk-adjusted relationships between industry payments and the primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In this study, 96.7% of THA surgeons and 97.4% of TKA surgeons received industry payments. After multivariable risk adjustment, for each $1,000 increase in industry payments, the total costs of THA increased by $0.50 (0.003% of total costs) and the operating room costs of THA increased by $0.20 (0.003% of total costs). Industry payments were not associated with TKA cost. Industry payments were not associated with 30-day mortality after either THA or TKA. Higher industry payments were independently associated with a marginal decrease in the length of stay for patients undergoing THA (0.0045 days per $1,000) or TKA (0.0035 days per $1,000) and a <0.1% increase in the odds of 30-day readmission after THA for every $1,000 in industry payments. The median total THA costs were $300 higher (p < 0.001), whereas the median TKA costs were $150 lower (p < 0.001), for surgeons receiving the highest 5% of industry payments. These surgical procedures were more often performed in large urban areas, in hospitals with a higher number of beds, with a higher wage index, and by more experienced surgeons and were associated with a 0.4 to 1-day shorter length of stay (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although most arthroplasty surgeons received industry payments, a minority of surgeons received the majority of payments. Overall, arthroplasty costs and outcomes were not meaningfully impacted by industry relationships.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Academic productivity correlates with industry earnings in foot and ankle fellowship programs in the United States: A retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The study investigates the connection between academic productivity and industry earnings in foot and ankle orthopedic surgery fellowships. Utilizing metrics like the H-index and Open Payments Database (OPD) data, it addresses a gap in understanding the relationship between scholarly achievements and financial outcomes, providing a basis for further exploration in this specialized medical field.

AIM

To elucidate the trends between academic productivity and industry earnings across foot and ankle orthopedic surgery fellowship programs in the United States.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of the relationship between academic productivity and industry earnings of foot and ankle orthopedic surgery fellowships at an individual faculty and fellowship level. Academic productivity was defined via H-index and recorded from the Scopus website. Industry earnings were recorded from the OPD.

RESULTS

Forty-eight foot and ankle orthopedic surgery fellowships (100% of fellowships) in the United States with a combined total of 165 physicians (95.9% of physicians) were included. Mean individual physician (n = 165) total life-time earnings reported on the OPD website was United States Dollar (USD) 451430.30 ± 1851084.89 (range: USD 25.16-21269249.85; median: USD 27839.80). Mean physician (n = 165) H-index as reported on Scopus is 14.24 ± 12.39 (range: 0-63; median: 11). There was a significant but weak correlation between individual physician H-index and individual physician total life-time earnings (P < 0.001; Spearman's rho = 0.334) and a significant and moderate positive correlation between combined fellowship H-index and total life-time earnings per fellowship (P = 0.004, Spearman's rho = 0.409).

CONCLUSION

There is a significant and positive correlation between academic productivity and industry earnings at foot and ankle orthopedic surgery fellowships in the United States. This observation is true on an individual physician level as well as on a fellowship level.

Funding has no effect on clinical outcomes of total joint arthroplasty emerging technologies: a systematic review of bibliometrics and conflicts of interest

Background

The use of new total joint arthroplasty technologies, including patient-specific implants/instrumentation (PSI), computer-assisted (CA), and robotic-assisted (RA) techniques, is increasing. There is an ongoing debate regarding the value provided and potential concerns about conflicts of interest (COI).

Methods

PRISMA guidelines were followed. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched for total hip and knee arthroplasties, unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA), PSI, CA, and RA. Bibliometric data, financial COI, clinical/functional scores, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed.

Results

Eighty-seven studies were evaluated, with 35 (40.2%) including at least one author reporting COI, and 13 (14.9%) disclosing industry funding. COI and industry funding had no significant effects on outcomes (P = 0.682, P = 0.447), and there were no significant effects of conflicts or funding on level of evidence (P = 0.508, P = 0.826). Studies in which author(s) disclosed COI had significantly higher relative citation ratio (RCR) and impact factor (IF) than those without (P < 0.001, P = 0.032). Subanalysis demonstrated RA and PSI studies were more likely to report COI or industry funding (P = 0.045). RA (OR = 6.31, 95% CI: 1.61–24.68) and UKA (OR = 9.14, 95% CI: 1.43–58.53) had higher odds of reporting favorable outcomes than PSI.

Conclusions

Author COIs (about 40%) may be lower than previously reported in orthopedic technologies/techniques reviews. Studies utilizing RA and PSI were more likely to report COI, while RA and UKA studies were more likely to report favorable outcomes than PSI. No statistically significant association between the presence of COIs and/or industry funding and the frequency of favorable outcomes or study level of evidence was found.

Level of evidence

Level V Systematic Review

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42836-022-00146-3.