深入分析 2015 至 2021 年矫形外科领域的公共和私人研究资金。

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Aakash K Shah, Robert J Burkhart, Varunil N Shah, Heath P Gould, Alexander J Acuña, Atul F Kamath
{"title":"深入分析 2015 至 2021 年矫形外科领域的公共和私人研究资金。","authors":"Aakash K Shah, Robert J Burkhart, Varunil N Shah, Heath P Gould, Alexander J Acuña, Atul F Kamath","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.00598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the trends and patterns of research funding can aid in enhancing growth and innovation in orthopaedic research. We sought to analyze financial trends in public orthopaedic surgery funding and characterize trends in private funding distribution among orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals to explore potential disparities across orthopaedic subspecialties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of private and public orthopaedic research funding from 2015 to 2021 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, respectively. Institutions receiving funds from both the NIH and the private sector were classified separately as publicly funded and privately funded. Research payment characteristics were categorized according to their respective orthopaedic fellowship subspecialties. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Mann-Kendall tests were employed. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over the study period, $348,428,969 in private and $701,078,031 in public research payments were reported. There were 2,229 unique surgeons receiving funding at 906 different institutions. The data showed that a total of 2,154 male orthopaedic surgeons received $342,939,782 and 75 female orthopaedic surgeons received $5,489,187 from 198 different private entities. The difference in the median payment size between male and female orthopaedic surgeons was not significant. The top 1% of all practicing orthopaedic surgeons received 99% of all private funding in 2021. The top 20 publicly and top 20 privately funded institutions received 77% of the public and 37% of the private funding, respectively. Private funding was greatest (31.5%) for projects exploring adult reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the amount of public research funding was more than double the amount of private research funding, the distribution of public research funding was concentrated in fewer institutions when compared with private research funding. This suggests the formation of orthopaedic centers of excellence (CoEs), which are programs that have high concentrations of talent and resources. Furthermore, the similar median payment by gender is indicative of equitable payment size. In the future, orthopaedic funding should follow a distribution model that aligns with the existing approach, giving priority to a nondiscriminatory stance regarding gender, and allocate funds toward CoEs.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Securing research funding is vital for driving innovation in orthopaedic surgery, which is crucial for enhancing clinical interventions. Thus, understanding the patterns and distribution of research funding can help orthopaedic surgeons tailor their future projects to better align with current funding trends, thereby increasing the likelihood of securing support for their work.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":"1631-1637"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An In-Depth Analysis of Public and Private Research Funding in Orthopaedic Surgery from 2015 to 2021.\",\"authors\":\"Aakash K Shah, Robert J Burkhart, Varunil N Shah, Heath P Gould, Alexander J Acuña, Atul F Kamath\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.23.00598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the trends and patterns of research funding can aid in enhancing growth and innovation in orthopaedic research. We sought to analyze financial trends in public orthopaedic surgery funding and characterize trends in private funding distribution among orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals to explore potential disparities across orthopaedic subspecialties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of private and public orthopaedic research funding from 2015 to 2021 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, respectively. Institutions receiving funds from both the NIH and the private sector were classified separately as publicly funded and privately funded. Research payment characteristics were categorized according to their respective orthopaedic fellowship subspecialties. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Mann-Kendall tests were employed. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over the study period, $348,428,969 in private and $701,078,031 in public research payments were reported. There were 2,229 unique surgeons receiving funding at 906 different institutions. The data showed that a total of 2,154 male orthopaedic surgeons received $342,939,782 and 75 female orthopaedic surgeons received $5,489,187 from 198 different private entities. The difference in the median payment size between male and female orthopaedic surgeons was not significant. The top 1% of all practicing orthopaedic surgeons received 99% of all private funding in 2021. The top 20 publicly and top 20 privately funded institutions received 77% of the public and 37% of the private funding, respectively. Private funding was greatest (31.5%) for projects exploring adult reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the amount of public research funding was more than double the amount of private research funding, the distribution of public research funding was concentrated in fewer institutions when compared with private research funding. This suggests the formation of orthopaedic centers of excellence (CoEs), which are programs that have high concentrations of talent and resources. Furthermore, the similar median payment by gender is indicative of equitable payment size. In the future, orthopaedic funding should follow a distribution model that aligns with the existing approach, giving priority to a nondiscriminatory stance regarding gender, and allocate funds toward CoEs.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Securing research funding is vital for driving innovation in orthopaedic surgery, which is crucial for enhancing clinical interventions. Thus, understanding the patterns and distribution of research funding can help orthopaedic surgeons tailor their future projects to better align with current funding trends, thereby increasing the likelihood of securing support for their work.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1631-1637\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.00598\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.00598","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:了解研究经费的趋势和模式有助于促进骨科研究的发展和创新。我们试图分析公共骨科手术资助的财务趋势,并描述骨科医生和医院之间私人资助分配的趋势,以探索骨科亚专科之间的潜在差异:我们分别使用美国医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心(Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services)的公开支付数据库和美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)通过蓝岭医学研究所(Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research)发布的RePORTER,对2015年至2021年的私人和公共骨科研究经费进行了横向分析。同时从美国国立卫生研究院和私营部门获得资金的机构被分别归类为公共资助机构和私人资助机构。研究经费的支付特征根据其各自的骨科研究金亚专科进行分类。采用了描述性统计、Wilcoxon 秩和检验和 Mann-Kendall 检验。结果在研究期间,共报告了 348,428,969 美元的私人研究经费和 701,078,031 美元的公共研究经费。共有 906 家不同机构的 2,229 名外科医生获得了资助。数据显示,共有 2,154 名骨科男外科医生和 75 名骨科女外科医生分别从 198 家不同的私人机构获得了 342,939,782 美元和 5,489,187 美元的资助。骨科男女外科医生的薪酬中位数差异不大。2021 年,所有执业骨科医生中排名前 1%的人获得了 99% 的私人资助。公共资助排名前 20 位的机构和私人资助排名前 20 位的机构分别获得了 77% 的公共资助和 37% 的私人资助。其中,研究成人重建的项目获得的私人资助最多(31.5%):结论:虽然公共研究资金的数额是私人研究资金的两倍多,但与私人研究资金相比,公共研究资金的分布集中在较少的机构。这表明骨科卓越中心(CoE)的形成,即人才和资源高度集中的项目。此外,不同性别的研究经费中位数相似,这也表明了研究经费的公平性。未来,骨科资金的分配模式应与现有方法保持一致,优先考虑对性别不歧视的立场,并将资金分配给CoEs:临床相关性:获得研究资金对于推动矫形外科的创新至关重要,而矫形外科的创新对于加强临床干预措施也至关重要。因此,了解研究经费的模式和分配情况可以帮助矫形外科医生调整其未来项目,使其更好地适应当前的经费趋势,从而提高其工作获得支持的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An In-Depth Analysis of Public and Private Research Funding in Orthopaedic Surgery from 2015 to 2021.

Background: Understanding the trends and patterns of research funding can aid in enhancing growth and innovation in orthopaedic research. We sought to analyze financial trends in public orthopaedic surgery funding and characterize trends in private funding distribution among orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals to explore potential disparities across orthopaedic subspecialties.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of private and public orthopaedic research funding from 2015 to 2021 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, respectively. Institutions receiving funds from both the NIH and the private sector were classified separately as publicly funded and privately funded. Research payment characteristics were categorized according to their respective orthopaedic fellowship subspecialties. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Mann-Kendall tests were employed. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: Over the study period, $348,428,969 in private and $701,078,031 in public research payments were reported. There were 2,229 unique surgeons receiving funding at 906 different institutions. The data showed that a total of 2,154 male orthopaedic surgeons received $342,939,782 and 75 female orthopaedic surgeons received $5,489,187 from 198 different private entities. The difference in the median payment size between male and female orthopaedic surgeons was not significant. The top 1% of all practicing orthopaedic surgeons received 99% of all private funding in 2021. The top 20 publicly and top 20 privately funded institutions received 77% of the public and 37% of the private funding, respectively. Private funding was greatest (31.5%) for projects exploring adult reconstruction.

Conclusion: While the amount of public research funding was more than double the amount of private research funding, the distribution of public research funding was concentrated in fewer institutions when compared with private research funding. This suggests the formation of orthopaedic centers of excellence (CoEs), which are programs that have high concentrations of talent and resources. Furthermore, the similar median payment by gender is indicative of equitable payment size. In the future, orthopaedic funding should follow a distribution model that aligns with the existing approach, giving priority to a nondiscriminatory stance regarding gender, and allocate funds toward CoEs.

Clinical relevance: Securing research funding is vital for driving innovation in orthopaedic surgery, which is crucial for enhancing clinical interventions. Thus, understanding the patterns and distribution of research funding can help orthopaedic surgeons tailor their future projects to better align with current funding trends, thereby increasing the likelihood of securing support for their work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信