Harrison Miner - Department of Orthopedic Surgery, The University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
James Slover - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, Second Floor, New York, NY, USA
Karl Koenig - Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

Background: Some have suggested the use of generic surgical implants to curb rising costs of orthopaedic care. However, there is evidence that patients are reluctant to use generic pharmaceuticals as compared to their brand name equivalents for fear of inferior quality. Public perception of the use of generic implants remains unknown. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey using Amazon MTurk to identify factors associated with a consumer preference for generic orthopaedic screws and total hip. Results: While much of the public (۵۲%) sees the value of generic implants, fewer (۲۶%) would prefer them in their own care. Most respondents (۷۵%) trust their surgeon’s choice, yet the vast majority (۸۳%) want to be informed about the cost of their implant, even if it makes no difference in what they pay. The agreement that older implants are safer than newer implants (OR ۱.۹ for screws; ۲.۵ for hip arthroplasty), and that generics are a better value than brand name implants (OR ۳.۰ for screws; ۴.۳ for hip arthroplasty) were independently associated with a preference for generics.Conclusion: The observation that many people view generic implants as being a good value, yet fewer would prefer to use them in their own care indicates that concerns over quality may initially limit utilization of generic implants. More evidence is needed to reassure most consumers of the safety and effectiveness of generic implants. Additionally, our findings demonstrate a desire for more implant price transparency when undergoing orthopaedic surgery.Level of evidence: II

Arthroplasty, Cost, Generic, Implant, Perception, Value