However, this year, manufacturers met with a different kind of electrophysiologist — a physician who asked new types of questions:

• Do studies support that this new technology is better in terms of patient outcome or operational efficiency?
• Are the marginal improvements in functionality presented actually worth the extra costs? Or can I continue using last-generation technology that produces results that are just as good?

• Does the use of this technology enhance patient access?
• What is the carbon emissions footprint of the new technology?
• Is there a life cycle analysis available that shows carbon emissions over the life of the device?
• Are there ways available to reduce the carbon emissions footprint, such as reprocessing or other forms of reuse?

Innovation is important in electrophysiology, and studies have shown that it is, in large part, physician preference for new and expensive technology that drives the increase in device costs. It is my hope that the balance between innovation and resource stewardship will continue to be discussed, specifically the role the electrophysiologist plays in securing population health as well as the financial and environmental sustainability of the procedure area.

About the author: Lars Thording is the VP of marketing and public affairs at Innovative Health LLC

Back to HCB News

Business Affairs Homepage