The reasons why surgeons prefer a particular total knee replacement (TKR) to other viable options with lower cost or lower revision risk remain uncertain. This study examined the concept of surgeon’s preference in TKR; including the self-assigned utility of their preferred prosthesis, reasons to alter usual preference and barriers to permanently changing preference.
Using a multinational electronic survey, 347 TKR performing orthopedic surgeons were studied using anonymous mandatory responses, mutually exclusive closed options, multiple responses blocking, automatic stem randomization, Likert scale weighting, and an absence of neutral options.
The highest rated of the 17 attributes were “reproducibility of outcome,” “best functional outcome,” and “better kinematics.” The lowest rated were a “key-opinion leader or mentor uses it” and “new or innovative.” “Lowest revision risk” ranked 10th, with 19.9% of surgeons stating it did not influence their preference. Cost did not influence 52.1% of surgeons and 33.7% agreed that their institution or system limited their preference. Surgeon’s demographics and preferred prosthesis or technique altered some attribute ratings including surgical volume, country of practice, type of preferred implant; however, revision risk rating was not altered by any factor. Cost considerations altered rating of barriers to technique change.
Understanding why surgeons prefer certain TKR prostheses or techniques to other viable alternatives is vital to reduce unwarranted variation. This study suggests that the self-assigned reasons driving surgeon’s preferences, reasons for preference alteration, and barriers to change are multifactorial, diverse, and complex, with revision risk not being the highest rated attribute.