RESUMO
BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.
RESUMO
Epidemiological studies have identified a robust association between type II diabetes mellitus and Alzheimer disease (AD), and neurobiological studies have suggested the presence of central nervous system insulin resistance in individuals with AD. Given this association, we hypothesized that the central nervous system-penetrant insulin-sensitizing medication metformin would be beneficial as a disease-modifying and/or symptomatic therapy for AD, and conducted a placebo-controlled crossover study of its effects on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), neuroimaging, and cognitive biomarkers. Twenty nondiabetic subjects with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to AD were randomized to receive metformin then placebo for 8 weeks each or vice versa. CSF and neuroimaging (Arterial Spin Label MRI) data were collected for biomarker analyses, and cognitive testing was performed. Metformin was found to be safe, well-tolerated, and measureable in CSF at an average steady-state concentration of 95.6 ng/mL. Metformin was associated with improved executive functioning, and trends suggested improvement in learning/memory and attention. No significant changes in cerebral blood flow were observed, though post hoc completer analyses suggested an increase in orbitofrontal cerebral blood flow with metformin exposure. Further study of these findings is warranted.