Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Consolidation and maturation of the orthopaedic medical device market between 1999 and 2015

  • Original Article • GENERAL ORTHOPAEDICS - DEVICES
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Orthopaedic surgeons often require highly specialized medical devices, implants, and equipment, which are usually offered by several vendors/companies. This study assesses long-term market trends for orthopaedic medical device companies and examines various implications for healthcare cost. Using S&P Capital IQ, a Wall Street database, financial data were gathered on orthopaedic device companies, ranked by worldwide sales, from 1999 to 2015. Annual sales were aggregated to calculate market share and compounded annual growth rates (CAGRs). Overall, the global orthopaedic device market grew at 12.0% CAGR from 1999 to 2008, before slowing to 2.8% from 2009 to 2015. Between 1999 and 2015, the top 5 companies increased total market share from 52.8 to 62.2%. The orthopaedic device market is not only consolidating under a few dominant players, but also growing at a decreasing rate, both of which signal a maturing industry. These trends are likely to shape patient care and healthcare costs in orthopaedic surgery in years to come.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gill PS (2013) Technological innovation and its effect on public health in the United States. J Multidiscip Healthc 6:31–40. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S34810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sorenson C, Drummond M, Bhuiyan Khan B (2013) Medical technology as a key driver of rising health expenditure: disentangling the relationship. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 5:223–234. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S39634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R et al (2005) Competition and Innovation: an inverted-U relationship. Q J Econ 120:701–728. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/120.2.701

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ng M, Song S, Piuzzi NS et al (2017) Stem cell industry update: 2012–2016 reveals accelerated investment, but market capitalization and earnings lag. Cytotherapy 19:1131–1139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2017.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McElroy M, Pivec R, Issa K et al (2013) The effects of obesity and morbid obesity on outcomes in TKA. J Knee Surg 26:083–088. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1341407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Etzioni DA, Liu JH, Maggard MA, Ko CY (2003) The aging population and its impact on the surgery workforce. Ann Surg 238:170–177. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.SLA.0000081085.98792.3d

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ulrich SD, Seyler TM, Bennett D et al (2008) Total hip arthroplasties: What are the reasons for revision? Int Orthop 32:597–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-007-0364-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lespasio M, Piuzzi NS, Husni ME et al (2017) Knee osteoarthritis: a primer. Perm J. https://doi.org/10.7812/tpp/16-183

    Google Scholar 

  9. Murray DW, Carr AJ, Bulstrode CJ (1995) Which primary total hip replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Br 77:520–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Manley MT, Sutton K (2008) Bearings of the future for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23:47–50.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2008.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. BonifacioMark (2016) A Healthy Prognosis for Medtech M&A. In: Orthop. Des. Technol

  12. Okike K, Pollak R, O’Toole RV, Pollak AN (2017) Red–yellow–green. J Bone Jt Surg 99:e33. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.16.00271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wasterlain AS, Melamed E, Bello R et al (2017) The effect of price on surgeons’ choice of implants: a randomized controlled survey. J Hand Surg Am. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.05.005

    Google Scholar 

  14. Piuzzi NS, Ng M, Chughtai M et al (2017) The stem-cell market for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a patient perspective. J Knee Surg. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1604443

    Google Scholar 

  15. Company Overview of Orthoworld, Inc. In: Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=7691589. Accessed 15 June 2018

  16. Poor’s S& S&P Capital IQ. https://www.capitaliq.com/. Accessed 15 June 2018

  17. Phillips CH (2012) S&P Capital IQ. J Bus Finance Librariansh 17:279–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2012.685022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Garde D (2012) Analysts: device market growth will outpace pharma by 2018. In: Fierce Biotech. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/medical-devices/analysts-device-market-growth-will-outpace-pharma-by-2018. Accessed 15 June 2018

  19. Cunningham J, Dolan B, Kelly D, Young C (2015) Medical device sectoral overview. The Whitaker Institute, Galway

    Google Scholar 

  20. Steinbrück K (1999) Epidemiologie von Sportverletzungen-25-Jahres-Analyse einer sportorthopädisch-traumatologischen Ambulanz. Sport Sport 13:38–52. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-993313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. George J, Piuzzi NS, Ng M et al (2017) Association between body mass index and thirty-day complications after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.038

    Google Scholar 

  22. Robinson JC, Pozen A, Tseng S, Bozic KJ (2012) Variability in costs associated with total hip and knee replacement implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:1693–1698. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.00355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Grennan M (2013) Price discrimination and bargaining: empirical evidence from medical devices. Am Econ Rev 103:145–177. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.1.145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Murphy J, Gray A, Cooper C et al (2016) Costs, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic and open repair for rotator cuff tears. Bone Joint J 98B:1648–1655. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.98b12.bjj-2016-0121.r1

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas S. Piuzzi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Piuzzi has nothing to disclose. Mr. Ng reports personal fees from Thessalus Capital, outside the submitted work; Mr. Song has nothing to disclose. Mr. Bigach has nothing to disclose. Dr. Khlopas has nothing to disclose. Dr. Salas-Vega has nothing to disclose. Dr. Mont reports other from Abbot, other from Cymedica, other from DJ Orthopaedics, other from Johnson & Johnson, other from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, other from Microport, other from Ongoing Care Solutions, other from OrthoSensor, other from Pacira, other from Peerwell, other from Performance Dynamics, other from Sage, other from Stryker, other from TissueGene, outside the submitted work.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplemental Table 1

Market capitalization and annual sales of top 10 orthopaedic medical device companies by market capitalization 1999 to 2015 (*all numbers in $M) (DOCX 46 kb)

Supplemental Table 2

Since certain companies had reporting segments that did not relate to orthopaedic devices (e.g., Zimmer and Biomet report dental sales), revenue adjustments were made (DOCX 140 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Piuzzi, N.S., Ng, M., Song, S. et al. Consolidation and maturation of the orthopaedic medical device market between 1999 and 2015. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29, 759–766 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02372-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02372-z

Keywords

Navigation