U.S. Hyaluronic Acid Viscosupplementation Physician Survey 2011
Over 100 orthopedic specialists were surveyed regarding their perceptions and usage of hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation during the 2011 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) conference. This survey report compares usage patters and perceptions of orthopedic specialists regarding hyaluronic acid viscosupplement product, including single injection, 3-injection and 5-injection therapy regimes. Satisfaction with current offerings is examined in detail, along with the market penetration of single injection products. The data presented describes practice experience, practice volume and the attitudes of the respondents to the product, as well as how these factors interact. In addition to physician brand preference, this survey report describes the proportion of doctors who would be willing to switch to a single injection product like Genzyme’s Synvisc-One®. The results of the survey indicated a high degree of familiarity with the product within the physician community. There is a general divide in the U.S. medical community between HA brands that are used for a majority of procedures within a practice. The respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the various injection products. This in term was compared to the probability of switching brands, and the possible motivating reasons for doing so.
The executive summary of this report is also available for purchase.
The executive summary of this report is also available for purchase.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 OVERVIEW
1.2 RESPONDENT PRACTICE LOCATION
1.3 COMPETING BRANDS
1.4 TRANSITION TO TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY
1.5 TIME TO PAIN RELIEF AFTER LAST HA INJECTION
1.6 PURCHASING DECISIONS
1.7 INCENTIVES RECEIVED BY BRAND
1.8 CANADIAN RESPONDENTS
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
2.1 RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
2.1.1 Doctor Profile
2.1.2 Purchasing Channels
2.2 RESPONSE SUMMARY
2.2.1 Attitudes Toward Products
2.2.2 Product Incentives
2.2.3 Patient Profile
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 RESEARCH OVERVIEW
3.2 RESEARCH SERVICES
3.3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
3.3.1 Step 1: Project Initiation & Team Selection
3.3.2 Step 2: Sample Population Preparation
3.3.3 Step 3: Preparation, Questionnaire Design & Administration
3.3.4 Step 4: Reporting and Analysis
3.3.5 Step 5: Customer Feedback
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
4.1 QUESTION 1: YEARS OF PRACTICE
4.2 QUESTION 2: VISCOSUPPLEMENT INJECTIONS ADMINISTERED PER MONTH
4.2.1 HA Patients Treated per Month
4.2.2 Monthly Patient Volume by Year of Practice
4.3 QUESTION 3: HA UTILIZATION BY BRAND
4.3.1 HA Utilization by Brand
4.3.2 HA Brand Preference Verses Practice Volume
4.4 QUESTION 4: REASONS FOR CHOOSING HA BRAND
4.5 QUESTION 5: LIKELIHOOD OF INCREASING SINGLE INJECTION USE
4.5.1 Likelihood of Increased Use
4.5.2 Correlation of Increased Use with Satisfaction
4.6 QUESTION 6: SATISFACTION WITH SINGLE INJECTION PRODUCTS
4.7 QUESTION 7: PERCENTAGE OF HA PATIENTS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY UNDERGO TOTAL
KNEE ARTHROPLASTY (TKA)
4.8 QUESTION 8: TIME TO TKA AFTER HA AND CONSERVATIVE TREATMENTS
4.8.1 Time to TKA
4.8.2 Time to TKA by Practice Profile
4.9 QUESTION 9: HA INJECTION TYPES USED BEFORE TKA
4.10 QUESTION 10: PERCEIVED BRAND PURCHASING INCENTIVES
4.11 QUESTION 11: NATURE OF INCENTIVES RECEIVED
4.11.1 Incentive Factors Received
4.11.2 Incentive Factors Received by Brand
4.12 QUESTION 12: REASONS TO SWITCH TO DIFFERENT HA BRAND
4.12.1 Reasons to Swtich Brands
4.12.2 Reasons to Switch Brands by Practice Profile
4.13 QUESTION 13: PATIENT GROUPS RECEIVING THE MOST BENEFIT FROM HA
4.14 QUESTION 14: IMPORTANCE OF PRICING
4.15 QUESTION 15: PURCHASING CHANNELS
4.15.1 Percentage of Respondents by Purchasing Channels
4.15.2 Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel
4.16 QUESTION 16: RESPONDENT CLINICAL SETTING
4.17 QUESTIONS 17 TO 19: TIME TO RELIEF
4.17.1 Overview of Time to Relief
4.17.2 Question 17: Time to Relief After Single Injection Treatment
4.17.3 Question 18: Time to Relief After 3-Injection Treatment
4.17.4 Question 19: Time to Relief After 5-Injection Treatment
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
5.1 QUESTION 1: YEARS OF PRACTICE
5.2 QUESTION 2: HYALURONIC ACID (HA) VISCOSUPPLEMENT INJECTIONS ADMINISTERED PER MONTH
5.3 QUESTION 3: HA UTILIZATION BY BRAND
5.4 QUESTION 4:REASONS FOR CHOOSING HA BRAND
5.5 QUESTION 5: LIKELIHOOD OF INCREASING SINGLE INJECTION USE
5.6 QUESTION 6: SATISFACTION WITH SINGLE INJECTION PRODUCTS
5.7 QUESTION 7: PERCENTAGE OF HA PATIENTS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY GO ON TO TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY (TKA)
5.8 QUESTION 8: TIME TO TKA AFTER HA AND CONSERVATIVE TREATMENTS
5.9 QUESTION 9: HA INJECTION TYPES USED BEFORE TKA
5.10 QUESTION 10: PERCEIVED BRAND PURCHASING INCENTIVES
5.11 QUESTION 11: NATURE OF INCENTIVES RECEIVED
5.12 QUESTION 12: REASONS TO SWITCH TO DIFFERENT HA BRAND
5.13 QUESTION 13: PATIENT GROUPS RECEIVING THE MOST BENEFIT FROM HA
5.14 QUESTION 14: IMPORTANCE OF PRICING
5.15 QUESTION 15: PURCHASING CHANNELS
5.16 QUESTION 16: RESPONDENT CLINICAL SETTING
5.17 QUESTION 17: TIME TO RELIEF AFTER INJECTION
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
1.1 OVERVIEW
1.2 RESPONDENT PRACTICE LOCATION
1.3 COMPETING BRANDS
1.4 TRANSITION TO TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY
1.5 TIME TO PAIN RELIEF AFTER LAST HA INJECTION
1.6 PURCHASING DECISIONS
1.7 INCENTIVES RECEIVED BY BRAND
1.8 CANADIAN RESPONDENTS
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
2.1 RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
2.1.1 Doctor Profile
2.1.2 Purchasing Channels
2.2 RESPONSE SUMMARY
2.2.1 Attitudes Toward Products
2.2.2 Product Incentives
2.2.3 Patient Profile
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 RESEARCH OVERVIEW
3.2 RESEARCH SERVICES
3.3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
3.3.1 Step 1: Project Initiation & Team Selection
3.3.2 Step 2: Sample Population Preparation
3.3.3 Step 3: Preparation, Questionnaire Design & Administration
3.3.4 Step 4: Reporting and Analysis
3.3.5 Step 5: Customer Feedback
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
4.1 QUESTION 1: YEARS OF PRACTICE
4.2 QUESTION 2: VISCOSUPPLEMENT INJECTIONS ADMINISTERED PER MONTH
4.2.1 HA Patients Treated per Month
4.2.2 Monthly Patient Volume by Year of Practice
4.3 QUESTION 3: HA UTILIZATION BY BRAND
4.3.1 HA Utilization by Brand
4.3.2 HA Brand Preference Verses Practice Volume
4.4 QUESTION 4: REASONS FOR CHOOSING HA BRAND
4.5 QUESTION 5: LIKELIHOOD OF INCREASING SINGLE INJECTION USE
4.5.1 Likelihood of Increased Use
4.5.2 Correlation of Increased Use with Satisfaction
4.6 QUESTION 6: SATISFACTION WITH SINGLE INJECTION PRODUCTS
4.7 QUESTION 7: PERCENTAGE OF HA PATIENTS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY UNDERGO TOTAL
KNEE ARTHROPLASTY (TKA)
4.8 QUESTION 8: TIME TO TKA AFTER HA AND CONSERVATIVE TREATMENTS
4.8.1 Time to TKA
4.8.2 Time to TKA by Practice Profile
4.9 QUESTION 9: HA INJECTION TYPES USED BEFORE TKA
4.10 QUESTION 10: PERCEIVED BRAND PURCHASING INCENTIVES
4.11 QUESTION 11: NATURE OF INCENTIVES RECEIVED
4.11.1 Incentive Factors Received
4.11.2 Incentive Factors Received by Brand
4.12 QUESTION 12: REASONS TO SWITCH TO DIFFERENT HA BRAND
4.12.1 Reasons to Swtich Brands
4.12.2 Reasons to Switch Brands by Practice Profile
4.13 QUESTION 13: PATIENT GROUPS RECEIVING THE MOST BENEFIT FROM HA
4.14 QUESTION 14: IMPORTANCE OF PRICING
4.15 QUESTION 15: PURCHASING CHANNELS
4.15.1 Percentage of Respondents by Purchasing Channels
4.15.2 Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel
4.16 QUESTION 16: RESPONDENT CLINICAL SETTING
4.17 QUESTIONS 17 TO 19: TIME TO RELIEF
4.17.1 Overview of Time to Relief
4.17.2 Question 17: Time to Relief After Single Injection Treatment
4.17.3 Question 18: Time to Relief After 3-Injection Treatment
4.17.4 Question 19: Time to Relief After 5-Injection Treatment
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
5.1 QUESTION 1: YEARS OF PRACTICE
5.2 QUESTION 2: HYALURONIC ACID (HA) VISCOSUPPLEMENT INJECTIONS ADMINISTERED PER MONTH
5.3 QUESTION 3: HA UTILIZATION BY BRAND
5.4 QUESTION 4:REASONS FOR CHOOSING HA BRAND
5.5 QUESTION 5: LIKELIHOOD OF INCREASING SINGLE INJECTION USE
5.6 QUESTION 6: SATISFACTION WITH SINGLE INJECTION PRODUCTS
5.7 QUESTION 7: PERCENTAGE OF HA PATIENTS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY GO ON TO TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY (TKA)
5.8 QUESTION 8: TIME TO TKA AFTER HA AND CONSERVATIVE TREATMENTS
5.9 QUESTION 9: HA INJECTION TYPES USED BEFORE TKA
5.10 QUESTION 10: PERCEIVED BRAND PURCHASING INCENTIVES
5.11 QUESTION 11: NATURE OF INCENTIVES RECEIVED
5.12 QUESTION 12: REASONS TO SWITCH TO DIFFERENT HA BRAND
5.13 QUESTION 13: PATIENT GROUPS RECEIVING THE MOST BENEFIT FROM HA
5.14 QUESTION 14: IMPORTANCE OF PRICING
5.15 QUESTION 15: PURCHASING CHANNELS
5.16 QUESTION 16: RESPONDENT CLINICAL SETTING
5.17 QUESTION 17: TIME TO RELIEF AFTER INJECTION
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
LIST OF FIGURES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 4-1: Years of Practice, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-2: HA Patients Treated per Month, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-3: Monthly Patient Volume by Year of Practice, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-4: HA Brand Frequency of Use, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-5: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-6: Practice Profile, Synvisc-One® Majority Use, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-7: Practice Profile, Three and Five Cycle Majority Use, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-8: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-9: Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-10: Satisfaction and Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection for Current Users of Synvisc-One®, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-11: Average Single Injection Satisfaction Verses Likelihood of Increasing Usage, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-12: Satisfaction wit Single Injection Products, All Respondents, U.S., 2011 .
Figure 4-13: Percentage of HA Patients that Subsequently Go on to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) , U.S., 2011
Figure 4-14: Time to TKA After HA and Conservative Treatments, Months, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-15: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, Weeks to TKA per Percentage of Patients that Require Surgery, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-16: HA Injection Types Used before TKA, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-17: HA Injection Types Used before TKA by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-18: Perceived Brand Purchasing Incentives, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-19: Nature of Incentives Received, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-20: Incentive Factors Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-21: Reasons to Switch to Different HA Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-22: Percent of Patients Who Undergo TKA for Respondents Choosing Better Clinical Efficacy as a Reason to Switch Brands, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-23: Percent of Patients Who Undergo TKA for Respondents Not Choosing Better Clinical Efficacy as a Reason to Switch Brands, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-24: Patient Groups Receiving the Most Benefit from HA
Figure 4-25: Importance of Pricing, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-26: Purchasing Channels, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-27: Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-28: Respondent Clinical Setting, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-29: Time to Relief Treatment by Injection Cycle, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-30: Time to Relief After Single Injection Treatment, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-31: Time to Relief After 3-Injection Treatment, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-32: Time to Relief After 5-Injection Treatment, U.S., 2011
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
LIST OF CHART'S
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chart 1-1: Hyaluronic Acid Usage Among Survey Respondents, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-2: Respondent Location by State, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-3: Percentage of Usage, Selected Brands, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-4: Time from HA Treatment to TKA in Weeks, 2011
Chart 1-5: Time to Relief After Last Injection in Weeks, All Types of HA Injections, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-6: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand, U.S., U.S., 2011
Chart 1-7: Incentives Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-8: Brand Preference, Canadian Respondents, U.S., 2011
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
Chart 4-1: Years of Practice, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-2: HA Patients per Month, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-3: Monthly Patient Volume per Year of Practice, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-4: HA Brand Frequency of Use, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-5: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011 (Part 1 of 2)
Chart 4-6: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011 (Part 2 of 2)
Chart 4-7: Monthly Patients Seen per Month by HA Preference, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-8: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand
Chart 4-9: Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-10: Satisfaction and Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011 .
Chart 4-11: Satisfaction wit Single Injection Products
Chart 4-12: Percentage of HA Patients that Subsequently Go on to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) , U.S., 2011
Chart 4-13: Time to TKA After HA and Conservative Treatments, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-14: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-15: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, Weeks to TKA per Percentage of Patients that Require Surgery, Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-16: HA Injection Types Used before TKA, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-17: Perceived Brand Purchasing Incentives
Chart 4-18: Nature of Incentives Received, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-19: Incentive Factors Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-20: Reasons to Switch to Different HA Brand
Chart 4-21: Patient Groups Receiving the Most Benefit from HA
Chart 4-22: Importance of Pricing, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-23: Purchasing Channels, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-24: Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-25: Respondent Clinical Setting, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-26: Time to Relief by Treatment Cycle, Weeks, U.S., 2011
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 4-1: Years of Practice, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-2: HA Patients Treated per Month, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-3: Monthly Patient Volume by Year of Practice, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-4: HA Brand Frequency of Use, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-5: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-6: Practice Profile, Synvisc-One® Majority Use, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-7: Practice Profile, Three and Five Cycle Majority Use, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-8: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-9: Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-10: Satisfaction and Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection for Current Users of Synvisc-One®, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-11: Average Single Injection Satisfaction Verses Likelihood of Increasing Usage, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-12: Satisfaction wit Single Injection Products, All Respondents, U.S., 2011 .
Figure 4-13: Percentage of HA Patients that Subsequently Go on to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) , U.S., 2011
Figure 4-14: Time to TKA After HA and Conservative Treatments, Months, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-15: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, Weeks to TKA per Percentage of Patients that Require Surgery, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-16: HA Injection Types Used before TKA, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-17: HA Injection Types Used before TKA by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-18: Perceived Brand Purchasing Incentives, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-19: Nature of Incentives Received, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-20: Incentive Factors Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-21: Reasons to Switch to Different HA Brand, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-22: Percent of Patients Who Undergo TKA for Respondents Choosing Better Clinical Efficacy as a Reason to Switch Brands, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-23: Percent of Patients Who Undergo TKA for Respondents Not Choosing Better Clinical Efficacy as a Reason to Switch Brands, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-24: Patient Groups Receiving the Most Benefit from HA
Figure 4-25: Importance of Pricing, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-26: Purchasing Channels, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-27: Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-28: Respondent Clinical Setting, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-29: Time to Relief Treatment by Injection Cycle, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-30: Time to Relief After Single Injection Treatment, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-31: Time to Relief After 3-Injection Treatment, Weeks, U.S., 2011
Figure 4-32: Time to Relief After 5-Injection Treatment, U.S., 2011
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
LIST OF CHART'S
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chart 1-1: Hyaluronic Acid Usage Among Survey Respondents, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-2: Respondent Location by State, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-3: Percentage of Usage, Selected Brands, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-4: Time from HA Treatment to TKA in Weeks, 2011
Chart 1-5: Time to Relief After Last Injection in Weeks, All Types of HA Injections, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-6: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand, U.S., U.S., 2011
Chart 1-7: Incentives Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Chart 1-8: Brand Preference, Canadian Respondents, U.S., 2011
SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
HYALURONIC ACID VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION SURVEY RESULTS
Chart 4-1: Years of Practice, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-2: HA Patients per Month, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-3: Monthly Patient Volume per Year of Practice, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-4: HA Brand Frequency of Use, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-5: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011 (Part 1 of 2)
Chart 4-6: HA Brand Frequency of Use by Response Distribution, U.S., 2011 (Part 2 of 2)
Chart 4-7: Monthly Patients Seen per Month by HA Preference, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-8: Reasons for Choosing a HA Brand
Chart 4-9: Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-10: Satisfaction and Likelihood of Switching to Single Injection, U.S., 2011 .
Chart 4-11: Satisfaction wit Single Injection Products
Chart 4-12: Percentage of HA Patients that Subsequently Go on to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) , U.S., 2011
Chart 4-13: Time to TKA After HA and Conservative Treatments, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-14: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-15: Time to TKA in Months by Practice Profile, Weeks to TKA per Percentage of Patients that Require Surgery, Response Distribution, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-16: HA Injection Types Used before TKA, Weighted Average, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-17: Perceived Brand Purchasing Incentives
Chart 4-18: Nature of Incentives Received, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-19: Incentive Factors Received by Brand, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-20: Reasons to Switch to Different HA Brand
Chart 4-21: Patient Groups Receiving the Most Benefit from HA
Chart 4-22: Importance of Pricing, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-23: Purchasing Channels, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-24: Importance of Pricing by Purchasing Channel, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-25: Respondent Clinical Setting, U.S., 2011
Chart 4-26: Time to Relief by Treatment Cycle, Weeks, U.S., 2011
APPENDIX 1: CANADIAN RESPONDENTS, 2011
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONS
