Having spoken to many industry professionals on the national level, the prevalence of physician owned distributorships has picked-up momentum. Times are very tough for those poor doctors. They no longer can earn a respectable living being a physician or a surgeon, today they are compelled in becoming much more than a surgeon, they want to become distributors. Yet, many people including the legacy companies believe that this is a conflict of interest. TSB would like to provide a forum to have an intelligent discussion without calling each other names. When you think of it, it does not serve any purpose. So here are the questions fellow bloggers;
Do POD's create a conflict of interest that can distort medical decision making because it provides surgeons with an incentive to use implants that will benefit them financially?
How do we know that POD's are actually keeping costs down?
Are POD's negotiating and opting for the best possible product for their patients, or are they seeking the cheapest deal that allow them to maximize their profitability?
With the proliferation of POD's the potential exists for improper inducements. Therefore, should these ventures be subject to intense scrutiny?
Like most business models, the POD could very well be a legitimate business model, yet, inherently POD's can give rise to a fundamental conflict of interest that places the physician's financial interest ahead of the patient's best interest. So what do you think? Is this a legitimate business model, and will it obsolete the need for having a rep? Or, will the industry eventually have some sort of hybrid? You be the Judge, TSB wants to know what you think?