This is a one hour talk.

Consumer’s Union had Dr Steve talk last month at Columbia School of Journalism.

It covers a lot of ground not only about the metal-metal hips but about hip replacement in general.

I am in the process of watching it myself and so can’t give you a big review here – but please post your thoughts and comments below.

Johnson & Johnson to Offer $2.5 Billion Hip Device Settlement

By BARRY MEIER

Published: November 19, 2013

Lawyers for Johnson & Johnson and patients injured by a flawed hip implant were expected to introduce a multibillion-dollar plan Tuesday to settle thousands of lawsuits, but it was not clear whether the deal would satisfy enough claimants.

Under the agreement, according to people briefed on the plan, the medical products giant will pay some $2.475 billion in compensation to an estimated 8,000 patients who have been forced to have the all-metal artificial hip removed and replaced with another device.

Separately, the company has agreed to pay all medical costs related to such procedures, expenses that could raise the deal’s cost to Johnson & Johnson to some $3 billion, said those familiar with the proposal, who did not want to be identified.

The typical patient payment for pain and suffering caused by the device will be about $250,000 before legal fees, under the plan. Based on standard agreements, plaintiffs’ lawyers would receive about one-third of the overall payout, or more than $800 million, with those who negotiated the plan emerging as big winners.

Read the full NY Times article here.

Related articles

• Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants (earlsview.com)
• Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants (nytimes.com)
• Johnson & Johnson DePuy hip implant settlement reported (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
• Johnson & Johnson Investors Sweat, but the Dow Bounces Back (fool.com)
• Johnson and Johnson Agrees to Settlement To Reach as High as $4 Billion to Resolve Patient Lawsuits With Flawed Hip Replacement Devices (ducknetweb.blogspot.com)
• Johnson & Johnson Reaches $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants (theatlanticwire.com)
• J&J Said to Reach $4 Billion Deal to Settle Hip Lawsuits (bloomberg.com)
• Johnson & Johnson to pay $4 billion settlement over metal-on-metal hip implants: Report (cbsnews.com)
• How Did This Company Lose Over $6 Billion in 2 Weeks? (fool.com)
• Gray and White Law Provides Expert Commentary on $4 Billion Expected Settlement in Johnson & Johnson DePuy ASR LawsuitsWhich Is Higher Than Previously Estimated (prweb.com)

Related articles

• The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax (nytimes.com)
• Does medical device price gauging really contribute to wide variation in hospital charges? (medcitynews.com)
• Medical device makers see hope for tax relief in federal shutdown talks (bizjournals.com)
• Questions raised on medical devices supplied by doctor firms (jsonline.com)
• New OIG study finds physician self-referral leads to increased spinal surgeries (pathologyblawg.com)
• 5 Ways mobile Is revolutionizing medical device sales (medcitynews.com)
• Merit Medical Engineers to Present at Compamed 2013 (hispanicbusiness.com)
• The new reality for medical devices: Justify your existence (medcitynews.com)

Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors

Related articles

• The piece of Obamacare that Dems wouldn’t mind giving up (tv.msnbc.com)
• Medical devices are in need of a health check following. (blogblooms.wordpress.com)
• What’s All This Federal Fuss Over An Obscure Medical Device Tax? (commonhealth.wbur.org)
• Medical Devices Secured Against Hackers by Using Heartbeats as Passwords (news.softpedia.com)
• Could New Tracking Codes on Medical Implants Save Lives? (scienceworldreport.com)
• Here’s What the House Voted on to Avoid a Gov’t Shutdown – and How It Could Affect Obamacare (theblaze.com)
• The Outlook for Medical Devices in Central & Eastern Europe (prweb.com)
• Your Worst Fears About Your Very Personal Info (txwclp.org)
• FDAnews Announces Cybersecurity Threats to Medical Devices Webinar, Oct. 18 (hispanicbusiness.com)
• EU Improves Safety of Medical Devices After PIP Breast Implant Scandal (medindia.net)

On July 18, 2013, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) released the results of a study aimed at examining the longevity of artificial hip implants. Researchers studied outcomes of more than 59,000 hip replacement surgeries performed in Canada between 2003 and 2011. Data was included from all the Canadian provinces, with the exception of Quebec.

Researchers found that patients who were implanted with a large-diameter modular metal-on-metal hip implant device had a 5.9% chance of needing revision surgery within five years after the original procedure. Patients who received other types of hip implant devices had a 2.7% chance of requiring revision surgery during that same time frame.

Cost of revision hip replacement surgery

According to researchers, cost and recovery time for revision surgery is much higher and much longer than patients’ original hip replacement surgery. CIHI says that patients having revision surgery remain in the hospital 17% longer and pay 45% more than they did during their initial hospitalization and rehabilitation.

Who gets metal-on-metal hip implants?

The majority of patients receiving metal-on-metal hip implants were men under the age of 55. Similar numbers have been found in studies conducted in Australia and the U.K. The metal-on-metal implants were originally marketed to this patient demographic, since they were highly touted for their increased mobility and durability.

“Metal-on-metal hip replacement implants were generally considered to be the most suitable implants for younger, more active patients who were traditionally at higher risk of repeat surgery due to the wear and tear they place on the implant,” Dr. Eric Bohm, orthopedic surgeon from the Concordia Hip and Knee Institute, was quoted as saying in the Canadian Institute of Health report.

Unfortunately, the choice to go with a metal-on-metal hip implant did not prove beneficial for some of those patients, as complications with the implants resulted in pain, reduced mobility and the need for subsequent surgery. In addition, CBC/Radio-Canada recently reported that some patients receiving these implants suffered tissue damage around the joint, after metal particles entered surrounding tissue and the bloodstream.

Legal trouble for makers of hip devices

In 2010, Johnson & Johnson issued a worldwide recall of its iconic metal-on-metal stars, DePuy ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Resurfacing System. A few short months after the recall was issued, the first class action lawsuit involving DePuy devices was filed in Quebec Superior Court.

Complaints about the devices include misalignment, loosening of the joint, dislocation, fracture, and metal debris around the joint. Plaintiffs have claimed that DePuy was aware of the potential problems with their devices, but refused to pull the devices from the market before patients were injured by the implants.

It is estimated that as many as 4,000 DePuy ASR hip implants have been used in Canadian patients. Over 37,000 of the devices were implanted in patients in the United States where the device manufacturer is also facing widespread and growing litigation.

Devices remain in wide use

Researchers in this recent study primarily focused on the large-diameter modular device. These devices feature a metal ball that fits inside a larger-than-normal metal socket. The purpose of the design was to improve mobility in younger, more active patients. Unfortunately, some surgeons have found the design is also more sensitive to malposition, which can increase the risk of metal particles rubbing off the device and entering the bloodstream.

The use of metal-on-metal hip implants appeared to peak between 2007 and 2008, but has been gradually decreasing since that time. Researchers in this study found the metal-on-metal devices only represented around 10% of the total number of devices examined. Metal-on-plastic devices were used in nearly three-fourths of the surgeries studied, and continue to be a popular choice for surgeons and patients today with seemingly fewer complications.

Bio:

Lance Andrews writes for Injury Lawyer News, where he reports on the effects of dangerous drugs and medical devices as well as recalled products. He is committed raising awareness about these issues to protect patient safety and consumer rights. His unique point of view comes from a combined education in journalism and medical studies.

Related articles

• Hire a Hip Implant Lawyer for Getting a Better Advice! (defectivekneeimplant.wordpress.com)
• DePuy Hip Replacement (csengerilaw.wordpress.com)
• Shouldn’t Hip & Knee Replacements Come With Warranties? (consumerist.com)
• Victims of Faulty DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implants Seek Compensation for Injuries (pinnaclelawsuit.typepad.com)
• America – the land of the brave and “ripped off”… (earlsview.com)
• Judge Agrees to Exclude 2010 Recall From a DePuy ASR Federal Trial (depuyasrnewsandupdates.wordpress.com)
• J&J Said to Weigh $3 Billion Settlement of Its Hip Implant Cases (bloomberg.com)
• Hip Implant Complaints Increased Largely (depuyrecall.typepad.com)
• In Wake of Stryker Lawsuits, FDA Advises Caution Over All Metal-on-Metal Hip Replacement Implants (pastry07mile.wordpress.com)
• California Man Has Elevated Cobalt Levels and Possible Need for Revision Surgery After His Biomet Hip Implant Failed, Alleges Lawsuit Filed by Parker Waichman LLP (virtual-strategy.com)

A Trip Abroad; Part 3: Joint Replacement; For Medical Tourists, Simple Math

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL | Published: August 3, 2013 New York Times

WARSAW, Ind. — Michael Shopenn’s artificial hip was made by a company based in this remote town, a global center of joint manufacturing. But he had to fly to Europe to have it installed.

Mr. Shopenn, 67, an architectural photographer and avid snowboarder, had been in such pain from arthritisthat he could not stand long enough to make coffee, let alone work. He had health insurance, but it would not cover a joint replacement because his degenerative disease was related to an old sports injury, thus considered a pre-existing condition.

Desperate to find an affordable solution, he reached out to a sailing buddy with friends at a medical device manufacturer, which arranged to provide his local hospital with an implant at what was described as the “list price” of $13,000, with no markup. But when the hospital’s finance office estimated that the hospital charges would run another $65,000, not including the surgeon’s fee, he knew he had to think outside the box, and outside the country.

“That was a third of my savings at the time,” Mr. Shopenn said recently from the living room of his condo in Boulder, Colo. “It wasn’t happening.”

“Very leery” of going to a developing country like India or Thailand, which both draw so-called medical tourists, he ultimately chose to have his hip replaced in 2007 at a private hospital outside Brussels for $13,660. That price included not only a hip joint, made by Warsaw-based Zimmer Holdings, but also all doctors’ fees, operating room charges, crutches, medicine, a hospital room for five days, a week in rehab and a round-trip ticket from America.

“We have the most expensive health care in the world, but it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the best,” Mr. Shopenn said. “I’m kind of the poster child for that.”

As the United States struggles to rein in its growing $2.7 trillion health care bill, the cost of medical devices like joint implants, pacemakers and artificial urinary valves offers a cautionary tale. Like many medical products orprocedures, they cost far more in the United States than in many other developed countries.

Makers of artificial implants — the biggest single cost of most joint replacement surgeries — have proved particularly adept at commanding inflated prices, according to health economists.Multiple intermediaries then mark up the charges. While Mr. Shopenn was offered an implant in the United States for $13,000, many privately insured patients are billed two to nearly three times that amount.

An artificial hip, however, costs only about $350 to manufacture in the United States, according to Dr. Blair Rhode, an orthopedist and entrepreneur whose company is developing generic implants. In Asia, it costs about $150, though some quality control issues could arise there, he said.

So why are implant list prices so high, and rising by more than 5 percent a year? In the United States, nearly all hip and knee implants — sterilized pieces of tooled metal, plastic or ceramics — are made by five companies, which some economists describe as a cartel. Manufacturers tweak old models and patent the changes as new products, with ever-bigger price tags.

Generic or foreign-made joint implants have been kept out of the United States by trade policy, patents and an expensive Food and Drug Administration approval process that deters start-ups from entering the market. The“companies defend this turf ferociously,” said Dr. Peter M. Cram, a physician at the University of Iowa medical school who studies the costs of health care.

Though the five companies make similar models, each cultivates intense brand loyalty through financial ties to surgeons and the use of a different tool kit and operating system for the installation of its products; orthopedists typically stay with the system they learned on. The thousands of hospitals and clinics that purchase implants try to bargain for deep discounts from manufacturers, but they have limited leverage since each buys a relatively small quantity from any one company.

In addition, device makers typically require doctors’ groups and hospitals to sign nondisclosure agreements about prices, which means institutions do not know what their competitors are paying. This secrecy erodes bargaining power and has allowed a small industry of profit-taking middlemen to flourish: joint implant purchasing consultants, implant billing companies, joint brokers. There are as many as 13 layers of vendors between the physician and the patient for a hip replacement,according to Kate Willhite, a former executive director of the Manitowoc Surgery Center in Wisconsin.

Hospitals and orthopedic clinics typically pay $4,500 to $7,500 for an artificial hip, according to MD Buyline and Orthopedic Network News, which track device pricing. But those numbers balloon with the cost of installation equipment and all the intermediaries’ fees, including an often hefty hospital markup.

That is why the hip implant for Joe Catugno, a patient at the Hospital for Joint Diseases in New York, accounted for nearly $37,000 of his approximately $100,000 hospital bill; Cigna, his insurer, paid close to $70,000 of the charges. At Mills-Peninsula Health Services in San Mateo, Calif., Susan Foley’s artificial knee, which costs about the same as a hip joint, was billed at $26,000 in a total hospital tally of $112,317. The components of Sonja Nelson’s hip at Sacred Heart Hospital in Pensacola, Fla., accounted for $30,581 of her $50,935 hospital bill. Insurers negotiate discounts on those charges, and patients have limited responsibility for the differences.

The basic design of artificial joints has not changed for decades. But increased volume — about one million knee and hip replacements are performed in the United States annually — and competition have not lowered prices, as would typically happen with products like clothes or cars. “There are a bunch of implants that are reasonably similar,” said James C. Robinson, a health economist at the University of California, Berkeley. “That should be great for the consumer, but it isn’t.”

‘Sticky Pricing’

The American health care market is plagued by such “sticky pricing,” in which prices of products remain high or even increase over time instead of dropping. The list price of a total hip implant increased nearly 300 percent from 1998 to 2011,according to Orthopedic Network News, a newsletter about the industry. That is a result, economists say, of how American medicine generally sets charges: without government regulation or genuine marketplace competition.

“Manufacturers will tell you it’s R&D and liability that makes implants so expensive and that they have the only one like it,” said Dr. Rory Wright, an orthopedist at the Orthopedic Hospital of Wisconsin, a top specialty clinic. “They price this way because they can.”

Zimmer Holdings declined to comment on pricing. But Sheryl Conley, a longtime Zimmer manager who is now the chief executive ofOrthoWorx, a local trade group in Warsaw, said that high prices reflected the increasing complexity of the joint implant business, including more advanced materials, new regulatory requirements and the logistics of providing a now huge array of devices. “When I started, there weren’t even left and right knee components,” she said. “It was one size fits all.”

Mr. Shopenn’s Zimmer hip has transformed his life, as did the replacement joint for Mr. Catugno, a TV director; Ms. Foley, a lawyer; and Ms. Nelson, a software development executive. Mr. Shopenn, an exuberant man who maintains a busy work schedule, recently hosted his son’s wedding and spent 26 days last winter teaching snowboarding to disabled people.

His joint implant and surgery in Belgium were priced according to a different logic. Like many other countries, Belgium oversees major medical purchases, approving dozens of different types of implants from a selection of manufacturers, and determining the allowed wholesale price for each of them, for example. That price, which is published, currently averages about $3,000, depending on the model, and can be marked up by about $180 per implant. (The Belgian hospital paid about $4,000 for Mr. Shopenn’s high-end Zimmer implant at a time when American hospitals were paying an average of over $8,000 for the same model.)

“The manufacturers do not have the right to sell an implant at a higher rate,” said Philip Boussauw, director of human resources and administration at St. Rembert’s, the hospital where Mr. Shopenn had his surgery. Nonetheless, he said, there was “a lot of competition” among American joint manufacturers to work with Belgian hospitals. “I’m sure they are making money,” he added.

Dr. Cram, the Iowa health cost expert, points out that joint manufacturers are businesses, operating within the constraints of varying laws and markets.

“Imagine you’re the C.E.O. of Zimmer,” he said. “Why charge $1,000 for the implant in the U.S. when you can charge $14,000? How would you answer to your shareholders?” Expecting device makers “to do otherwise is like asking, ‘Couldn’t Apple just charge $50 for an iPhone?’ because that’s what it costs to make them.”

But do Americans want medical devices priced like smartphones? “That,” Dr. Cram said, “is a different question.”

A Miracle for Many

When joint replacement surgery first became widely used in the 1970s, it was reserved for older patients with crippling pain from arthritis, to offer relief and restore some mobility. But as technology and techniques improved, its use broadened to include younger, less debilitated patients who wanted to maintain an active lifestyle, including vigorous sports or exercise.

In the first few decades, implants were typically cemented into place. But since the 1980s, many surgeons have used implants made of more sophisticated materials that allow the patient’s own bone to grow in to hold the device in place. For most patients, implants have proved miraculous in improving quality of life, which is why socialized medical systems tend to cover them. Per capita, more hip replacements are done in Britain, Sweden and the Netherlands, for example, than in the United States.

Motivated in part by science and in part by the need to create new markets, joint makers churn out new designs that are patented, priced higher and introduced with free training courses for surgeons. Some use more durable materials so that a patient requiring a hip implant at age 40 or 50 might rely on it longer than the standard 20 years, while other models are streamlined and require smaller incisions.

Zimmer got a big sales bump a few years ago when it began promoting its new “female knee,” a slightly slimmer version of its standard design, in an advertising campaign directed at patients. Hospitals on average pay about $800 more to buy the gender-specific knee implants, according to MD Buyline.

Many doctors say that for most patients, older, standard implants with a successful track record are appropriate. Expensive modifications make no difference for the typical patient, but they drive up prices for all models and have sometimes proved to be deeply flawed, they say.

In the last few years, joint manufacturers have faced lawsuits and have settled claims with patients after new, all-metal implants, which were meant to be more durable than the standard version, had unusually high failure rates. As for those “female knees,” a study featured at the meeting of the American College of Orthopedic Surgeons this year concluded, “While we certainly use the female components frequently in surgery, we don’t detect any objective improvement in clinical outcomes.”

That is why Dr. Scott S. Kelley, an orthopedist affiliated with Duke University Medical Center, generally tries to dissuade patients who request “new, improved” joints. “I tell them: ‘That’s taking a big riskfor the potential of a few percentage points of improvement. You wouldn’t invest your retirement account this way.’ ”

A Town’s Lifeblood

The power and profits of the medical device industry are on display here in Warsaw, which has trademarked itself the Orthopedic Capital of the World. Four of the big five joint manufacturers in the world are based in the United States; the other is in Britain. Three of these giants — Zimmer, Biomet and DePuy, a division of Johnson & Johnson — have their headquarters here, a town of 14,000.

An industry that began as a splint-making shop in 1895 has made Warsaw the center of a global multibillion-dollar business. The companies based here produce about 60 percent of the hip and knee devices used in the United States and one-third of the world’s orthopedic sales volume, local officials said. Nearly half the jobs in Kosciusko County, where Warsaw is, are tied to the industry. Residents joke that a mixed marriage is when one spouse works for Zimmer and the other for DePuy.

The industry’s benefits are evident. The county has the lowest unemployment rate in Northern Indiana, and the median family income of $50,000 puts it significantly above the state average. The town boasts lush golf courses and streets lined with spacious homes. The lobby of the elegant City Hall, which is in a restored 1912 bank, features plaques about device manufacturers.

“We eat, sleep and breathe orthopedics,” said Ms. Conley of OrthoWorx, which she said was set up to “plan for the future of the orthopedic industry here.” OrthoWorx’s board of directors includes executives from Biomet and DePuy.

With a high-tech industry as its lifeblood, Ms. Conley said, Warsaw needed to attract engineers and doctors from afar and train local youths for “the business.” It has upgraded the public schools and helped create programs at local colleges in orthopedic regulation and advanced machinist techniques.

Officials at OrthoWorx say the device makers do not discuss “competitive issues” among themselves, including the prices of implants, even as employees stand together watching their children play baseball. Still, it is in everyone’s interest not to undercut the competition. In 2011, all three manufacturers had joint implant sales exceeding $1 billion and spent about only 5 percent of revenues on research and development, compared with 20 percent in the pharmaceutical industry, said Stan Mendenhall, the editor of Orthopedic Network News. They each paid their chief executives over $8 million.

“It’s amazing to think there is $5 billion to $6 billion going through this little place in Northern Indiana,” said Mr. Mendenhall, adding that the recession has meant only single-digit annual revenue growth rather than the double-digit growth of the past.

Device makers have used some of their profits to lobby Congress and to buy brand loyalty. In 2007, joint makers paid $311 million to settle Justice Department accusations that they were paying kickbacks to surgeons who used their devices; Zimmer paid the biggest fine, $169.5 million. That year, nearly 1,000 orthopedists in the United States received a total of about $200 million in payments from joint manufacturers for consulting, royalties and other activities, according to data released as part of the settlement.

Despite that penalty, payments continued, according to a paper published in The Archives of Internal Medicine in 2011. While some of the orthopedists are doing research for the companies, the roles of others is unclear, said Dr. Cram, one of the study’s authors.

Although only a tiny percentage of orthopedists receive payments directly from manufacturers, the web of connections is nonetheless tangled.

Companies “build a personal relationship with the doctor,” said Professor Robinson, the Berkeley economist. “The companies hire sales reps who are good at engineering and good at golf. They bring suitcases into the operating room,” advising which tools might work best among the hundreds they carry, he said. And some studies have shown that operations attended by a company representative are more likely to use more and costlier medical equipment. While some hospitals have banned manufacturers’ representatives from the operating room, or have at least blocked salesmanship there, most have not.

No Gift Shop

There are, of course, a number of factors that explain why Mr. Shopenn’s surgery in Belgium would cost many times more in the United States. In America, fees for hospitals, scans, physical therapyand surgeons are generally far higher. And in Belgium, even private hospitals are more spartan.

When Mr. Shopenn arrived at the hospital, he was taken aback by the contrast with NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, where his father had been a patient a year before. The New York facility had “comfortable waiting rooms, an elegant lobby and newsstands,” Mr. Shopenn remembered.

But in Belgium, he said, “I was immediately scared because at first I thought, this is really old. The chairs in the waiting rooms were metal, the walls were painted a pale green, there was no gift shop. But then I realized everything was new. It was just functional. There wasn’t much of a nod to comfort because they were there to provide health care.”

The pricing system in Belgium does not encourage amenities, though the country has among the lowest surgical infection rates in the world — lower than in the United States — and is known for good doctors.While most Belgian physicians and hospitals are in business for themselves, the government sets pricing and limits profits. Hospitals get a fixed daily rate and surgeons receive a fee for each surgery, which are negotiated each year between national medical groups and the state.

While doctors may charge more than the rate, few do so because most patients would refuse to pay it, said Mr. Boussauw, the hospital administrator. Doctors and hospitals must provide estimates. European orthopedists tend to make about half the income of their American counterparts, whose annual income averaged $442,450 in 2011,according to a survey by the Commonwealth Fund, a foundation that studies health policy.

Belgium pays for health care through a mandatory national insurance plan, which requires contributions from employers and workers and pays for 80 percent of each treatment. Except for the poor, patients are generally responsible for the remaining 20 percent of charges, and many get private insurance to cover that portion.

Mr. Shopenn’s surgery, which was uneventful, took place on a Tuesday. On Friday he was transferred for a week to the hospital’s rehabilitation unit, where he was taught exercises to perform once he got home.

Twelve days after his arrival, he paid the hospital’s standard price for hip replacements for foreign patients. Six weeks later he saw an orthopedist in Seattle, where he was living at the time, to remove stitches and take a postoperative X-ray. “He said there was no need for further visits, that the hip looked great, to go out and enjoy myself,” Mr. Shopenn said.

With baby boomers determined to continue skiing, biking and running into their 60s and beyond, economists predict a surge in joint replacement surgeries, and more procedures for younger patients. The number of hip and knee replacements is expected to roughly double between 2010 and 2020, according to Exponent, a scientific consulting firm, and perhaps quadruple by 2030. If insurers paid $36,000 for each surgery, a fairly typical price in the commercial sector, the total cost would be $144 billion, about a sixth of the nation’s military budget last year.

So far, attempts to bring down the price of medical devices have been undercut by the industry.

When Dr. Daniel S. Elliott of the Mayo Clinic decided to continue using an older, cheaper valve to cure incontinence because studies showed that it was just as good as a newer, more expensive model, the manufacturer raised its price.

“If there was a generic, I’d be there tomorrow,” he said.

With artificial joints, cost-trimming efforts have been similarly ineffective. Medicare does not negotiate directly with manufacturers, but offers all-inclusive payments for surgery to hospitals to prompt them to bargain harder for better implant prices. Instead, hospitals complain that acquiring the implant consumes 50 percent to 70 percent of Medicare’s reimbursement, which now averages $12,099, up 25 percent from $9,645 in 1993. Meanwhile, surgeons’ fees have dropped by nearly half.

With the federal government unwilling to intervene directly, some doctors and insurance plans are themselves trying to reduce the costs by mandating preset prices or forcing more competition and transparency.

After concluding that hip replacements billed at $100,000 yielded no better results than less expensive ones, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, or Calpers, told members that it would pay hospitals $30,000 for a hip or knee replacement, and dozens of hospitals have met that number.

Dr. Wright’s orthopedic hospital near Milwaukee has driven down payments for joints by more than 30 percent by resolving to use only two types of hip implants and requiring blind bids directly from the manufacturers; part of the savings is passed on to patients.

The Affordable Care Act tries to recoup some of the medical device manufacturers’ profits by imposing a 2.3 percent tax on their revenues, effective this year. But Brad Bishop, the executive director of OrthoWorx and a former Zimmer executive, said that the approach would harm an innovative American industry, and that the cost would ultimately be borne by joint replacement patients “whose average age is 67.” He argued that the best way to reduce the cost of joint replacement surgery was to rescind the tax and decrease government interference.

The medical device industry spent nearly $30 million last year on lobbying, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The Senate moved to repeal the tax, and the House is expected to take it up this fall. The bill’s supporters included both senators from Indiana.

Mr. Shopenn’s new hip worked so well that a few months after returning from Belgium he needed a hernia operation — a result of too much working out at the gym. He was home by 4 p.m. the day of the outpatient surgery, but the bill came to $16,500. Though his insurance company covered the procedure, he called the hospital’s finance department for an explanation.

He remembers in particular a “surreal” discussion with a “very nice” administrator about a $750 bill for a surgical drain, which he called“a piece of plastic in a sealed bag.”

“It was mind-boggling to me that the surgery could possibly cost this much,” he said, “after what I’d just done in Belgium.”

Related articles

• For Medical Tourists, Simple Math by Elisabeth Rosenthal (clubalthea.com)
• Here’s why U.S. patients pay inflated prices for new hips, knees (seattletimes.com)
• For medical tourists, it’s simple math (wnd.com)
• Medical Mysteries (justoneminute.typepad.com)
• Products Included in the Ceramic Hip Replacement Recall (arthritis.answers.com)
• Risks and Rewards of Cemented Hip Replacements (arthritis.answers.com)
• Four Basic Facts About Hip Replacement Surgery (theroadtohipsurgery.wordpress.com)
• In Need of _____, But Priced Out of America (mcleanparlor.com)
• The lobbyists have mounted up (digbysblog.blogspot.com)
• Metal-on-metal hip implants more likely to need replacement (cbc.ca)

Stuart Cain talks about his horrific time post DePuy ASR revision.

Click here

Here is his interview/article from the SUnday Telegraph too.

Click on this link below:

Stuart Cain Sunday Telegraph Article

Related articles

• US Drug Watchdog Now Calls A Blood Test For A DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implant Blood Vital And They Urge Recipients To Call Them For More Information About Premature Failures (prweb.com)
• US Drug Watchdog Now Urges All DePuy Pinnacle All Metal Hip Implant Recipients To Call Them About A Specific Blood Test Designed To Determine A Failure-Nationwide (prweb.com)

Related articles

• Data show hip replacement revision rate low, though higher with metal-on-metal (globalnews.ca)
• Metal on Metal Long Term Risks Confirmed (earlsview.com)
• Products Included in the Ceramic Hip Replacement Recall (arthritis.answers.com)
• Risks, Benefits and Recovery From Birmingham Hip Procedures (arthritis.answers.com)
• Metal-on-metal hip implants more likely to need replacement (cbc.ca)
• Risks and Rewards of Cemented Hip Replacements (arthritis.answers.com)
• Hip Resurfacing an Alternative to Hip Replacement (hothealthnews.wordpress.com)
• Understanding Hip Revision Surgery: A Medical Overview (orthopedics.answers.com)

Smith and Nephew

Motion to Consolidate

Levin Papantonio has filed a motion to consolidate all Smith and Nephew R3 and BHR metal-on-metal hip implants in the state court of Tennessee in Shelby County.

Smith and Nephew metal-on-metal hip implants are currently affecting thousands of patients suffering from severe side effects across the United States. These devices are failing at a rate much higher than expected, posing serious health problems.

Smith and Nephew continued to market these products in disregard to reports that showed metal-on-metal hip implants failing at a higher rate than metal on polyethylene hip implants and causing excessive cobalt and chromium ions being released into the body.

Read more here http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=9255428b29c9c8bc4f4468660&id=8bf878c77a&e=92a5d8d99e 

Related articles

• Hanna’s Story – another Smith & Nephew BHR tale of disaster (earlsview.com)
• Hip Replacement Lawsuit Website Launched by Bernstein Liebhard LLP to Provide Updated Information on Hip Replacement Recalls, Growing Metal Hip Implant Litigation (prweb.com)
• Profits Drop 4% at Smith & Nephew (fool.com)
• Conflict of Interest of “industry experts” – Open letter from Dr Steve to Dr Frick… (earlsview.com)
• HUNGER STRIKE – Smith & Nephew BHR problems drive Paige to Ruin & Desperate Measures – HUNGER STRIKE (earlsview.com)
• Profits Drop 4% at Smith & Nephew (dailyfinance.com)
• Jury Awards DePuy ASR Victim $8.3 Million, Many More Likely to Come Says Anapol Schwartz Attorney (prweb.com)
• Hip Resurfacing Procedures: A Viable Alternative to Hip Replacements (orthopedics.answers.com)
• Introducing Hip Resurfacing: A Minimally-Invasive Alternative to Hip Replacements (prweb.com)
• Emerging Markets Heat Up for Device Makers (dailyfinance.com)

Study: Metal Hip Pain and Tissue Damage

The annual meeting of the 2013 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) in Chicago has just concluded and doctors delivered a mixed report on metal-on-metal hip replacements.

In a study presented from New York State’s Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS), researchers found unexplained pain in metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implant patients is more likely due to tissue damage surrounding the prosthesis rather than wear of the implant.

Hip Replacement

HSS is ranked nationally No. 1 in orthopedics by U.S. News & World Report and researchers wanted to know what caused the increasing number of unexplained pain complaints that eventually lead to hip revision. Among the 9,000 hip implant procedures done by HSS annually, 10% are revisions.

Researchers compared 50 patients who had unexplained pain to a control group of 48 patients who came to HSS with infection, fracture misalignment or loosening of the hip.  They measured adverse tissue reaction to metal ions and conducted a wear analysis on removed implants.

Among the group with unexplained pain, 60% had moderate to high rate of tissue reaction and 12% had a buildup of metal ions in soft tissues. The age, sex, body mass, size and length of the implant did not seem to explain pain and patients in both groups had similar wear on the implants.  Some patients had a lot of tissue damage, but that was not related to wear, suggesting other factors are causing the damage.

When metal hips were introduced, the industry thought MoM hips were a positive innovation in their ability to remain well-lubricated which minimizes wear, but the thousands of lawsuits filed by injured patients tell another story.

Metal-on-metal hip implants have unique risks.  In a MoM hip, the ball and socket is made of metal, usually chromium and cobalt.  The metal components can come in contact during walking or running which can release metal particles around the implant, the tissue and surrounding muscles. The scientific community believes the metal ions causes damage that is irreversible and can lead to an early revision of the hip implant.

The suggestion is for doctors to closely follow hip implant patients with unexplained pain before there is significant tissue damage.

AAOS members also sang the praises of a total hip replacement (THR) concluding itincreases the life span and reduces the risk of heart failure, depression and diabetes among the 43,000 Medicare patients with osteoarthritis that were studied.

The study was undertaken to determine the cost-effectiveness of THR treatment seven years after implant but the findings reveal that hip recipients cost Medicare $6,000 more than non-THR patients.

Article Source: http://www.strykerimplantrecall.com/2013/04/04/study-metal-hip-pain-and-tissue-damage/ 

Related articles

• Iowa Resident Brings Suit Against Stryker For Damages Caused By Recalled Hip Implant – News Press Release | PharmiWeb.com (earlsview.com)
• Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Recall Lawsuit News: Updated Information for Stryker Hip Implant Recall Lawsuits In State & Federal Courts, Provided By Alonso Krangle LLP (prweb.com)
• Stryker Revises Estimates Upwards As To Expenses Related To Defective Rejuvenate & ABG II Hips (prweb.com)
• Signs Your Hip Implants Are Hurting You (earlsview.com)
• Smith & Nephew Failure Warning for Birmingham Hip Implant (earlsview.com)
• Hip implant patients with unexplained pain likely to have tissue damage (medicalxpress.com)
• Hip implant patients with unexplained pain likely to have tissue damage (eurekalert.org)
• US Drug Watchdog Now Urges All Metal Hip Implant Recipients Who Have Had Revision Surgeries To Call Them For The Names of Attorneys To Help Them Get Compensated (prweb.com)
• Safety Communications FDA Safety Communication: Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants (earlsview.com)