ONTARIO HOSPITALS PURCHASING PRACTICES FOR HIP AND KNEE PROSTHESES - A SURVEY

Citation
Cm. Cheung et al., ONTARIO HOSPITALS PURCHASING PRACTICES FOR HIP AND KNEE PROSTHESES - A SURVEY, CAN J SURG, 41(4), 1998, pp. 309-315
Citations number
23
Categorie Soggetti
Surgery
Journal title
Canadian journal of surgery
ISSN journal
0008428X → ACNP
Volume
41
Issue
4
Year of publication
1998
Pages
309 - 315
Database
ISI
SICI code
0008-428X(1998)41:4<309:OHPPFH>2.0.ZU;2-9
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: TO determine the makes, models and prices of the implants provided by Ontario hospitals for hip and knee replacements and the po licies and procedures governing purchases. DESIGN: A questionnaire sur vey of hospitals with telephone follow-up. STUDY POPULATION: Seventy-n ine public hospitals in Ontario in which 10 or more hip or knee replac ements were carried out in the fiscal year 1993/94. SURVEY RESPONSE: S eventy-six hospitals returned questionnaires (96% response rate), repo rting on 4950 primary hip and 5107 primary knee implants. Sixty-two ho spitals reported volumes and prices for 19 models used in 2961 hip imp lants. Information on price but not makes and models was available for 1989 hip implants. Model and price information was missing for 340 hi p prostheses. Fifty-seven hospitals identified the models and prices f or 3460 knee implants. Twenty-five hospitals provided prices but not s pecific models names for 1647 knee implants and hybrids. OUTCOME MEASU RE: The prices paid for prostheses. RESULTS: The average price of hip implants was Can$2141 (range from Can$650 to Can$3559). The average pr ice for knee implants was Can$2412 (range from Can$1178 to Can$3777). The averages and ranges were about the same for specified and unspecif ied models and hybrids. The Variations were unrelated to hospital poli cies about the numbers of procedures to be provided or the procedures for making purchases from suppliers. CONCLUSIONS: Savings of Can$13.7 million could have been made in Ontario during the fiscal year 1993/94 had the lowest prices been paid for the implants. Although it may be neither desirable nor possible to use the least ex-pensive model and p rice in every hospital, the potential for cost reductions in the pur c hase of implants is substantial.