The Availability and Pricing of Orthobiologic Knee Injections in the Chicago Metropolitan Area: A Market Assessment Study.

Abstract

Background: Despite mounting clinical evidence for the utility of orthobiologics in nonoperative management of orthopaedic pathology, the market for orthobiologic therapies remains largely unregulated by the Food and Drug Administration, giving rise to a wide range of pricing for these therapeutics by different provider types.

Purpose: To determine the availability and pricing for platelet-rich plasma (PRP), amniotic or adipose "stem cell," and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMC) injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis among orthopaedic sports medicine and alternative providers (eg, chiropractic clinics and stand-alone "regenerative medicine" clinics) in a major metropolitan city.

Study design: Cross-sectional study.

Methods: Orthopaedic sports medicine providers in the Chicagoland area were identified through the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) and Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) surgeon databases. Alternative clinics offering orthobiologic injections were systematically compiled using Yelp! and Google search listings and reviews. Clinics were contacted using a standardized telephone script. Data were collected for each site on the types of injections offered, whether price was disclosed over the telephone, the price of injections offered, and the source of stem cell injections if they were provided. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the mean price between practices. F tests for equality of variances were used to compare the variability in prices between practice types.

Results: A total of 25 unique orthopaedic sports medicine practices (comprising 80 AOSSM/AANA surgeons) and 40 alternative clinics offered PRP, stem cell, and/or BMC injections, as indicated over the telephone. There was no difference in likelihood of offering PRP (P = .698) or BMC injections (P = .340). However, alternative clinics were significantly more likely to offer stem cell injections (P < .001). There was no difference in the willingness to disclose the price for PRP (P = .269), stem cell injections (P = .302), and BMC (P = .528) or the source of what each clinic advertised as stem cell injections (P = .630). The mean price for a single PRP injection was significantly higher (P = .011) and significantly more variable (F statistic = .139; P < .001) at alternative clinics. Similarly, the mean price for a single stem cell injection was significantly higher (P < .001) and significantly more variable (F statistic = 0.080; P = .025) at alternative clinics.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that orthobiologic knee injections are highly prevalent for in-clinic use within the Chicago metropolitan area, with PRP being the most commonly used therapeutic. When compared with orthopaedic sports medicine providers, alternative clinics were more likely to offer stem cell injections and charge a significantly greater and more variable amount per PRP and stem cell treatment.