Competitive bidding for interventional cardiology supplies: Lessons learned during round 2

Kim A. Eagle*, Bradley P. Knight, Mauro Moscucci, S. Adam Strickberger, Claire S. Duvernoy, Frank Pelosi, Steven W. Werns, Daniel T. Eitzman, Fred Morady, Eric R. Bates

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To assess the magnitude of savings and develop concepts for "best strategies" in reducing costs in the purchasing of high-technology, high-cost materials used in coronary interventions and electrophysiologic treatments. Study design: Observational experience in competitive bidding for defibrillators, pacemakers, coronary stents, and coronary balloon catheters at a large, midwestern, publicly owned, academic cardiovascular center. Methods: Iterative negotiation following a broad request for proposal sent to a diverse group of vending organizations in high-technology areas of cardiology. Product costs and volume usage were assessed before and after the process to estimate annualized cost reduction achieved. Results: Using a combination of identification of preferred vendors; consignment of supplies; and collaborative consensus among physicians, administration, materials management, purchasing, and vendors, an annualized savings of more than $1.3 million was achieved. Conclusions: Aggressive, collaborative, fair, and competitive bidding for high-cost products used for coronary interventions and electrophysiologic treatments leads to substantial cost savings and can promote provider-industry partnerships that further enhance product use, provision, and tracking.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)384-388
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Managed Care
Volume8
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 29 2002

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Competitive bidding for interventional cardiology supplies: Lessons learned during round 2'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this