首頁 產業/市場分類 出版商一覽 Email 通知 GII媒體代理會議 公司簡介 聯絡我們
- English Japanese Korean
產業/市場分類
醫療設備 (3974)
內視鏡檢查設備 (113)
分子呈像/呈影劑 (29)
心血管設備 (244)
可拋式醫學設備 (83)
核子醫學 (75)
病患監測 (343)
眼科設備 (100)
傷口護理 (87)
超音波 (49)
齒科設備 (172)
導管 (198)
整形外科 (329)
醫學影像診斷 (399)
體外診斷設備 (387)
CT/MRI/X光 (142)
e保健 (309)
市場調查報告書

整形外科機會

The Orthopedic Surgery Opportunity Index: Capitalizing on Market Gaps

出版商 Valid Results, Inc
出版日期 2006年12月 商品編碼 55670
內容資訊 英文 66 pages
價格
US $ 3500 Hard Copy (Single User License)
US $ 3500 PDF by E-mail (Single User License)
US $ 3500 PDF On CD-ROM (Single User License)
US $ 4200 Hard Copy (Global Site License)
US $ 4200 PDF by E-mail (Global Site License)
US $ 4200 PDF On CD-ROM (Global Site License)


整形外科機會 是由出版商Valid Results, Inc在2006年12月所出版的。 這份英文市場調查報告書包含66 pages 價格從美金3500起跳。

簡介

專門提供醫療設備領域相關權威資訊的美國市調公司 Valid Results, Inc(總公司:Florida state)出版了一本關於整形外科機會的報告書 "The Orthopedic Surgery Opportunity Index: Capitalizing on Market Gaps" 。

本報告書內容包括:針對隨機抽出的102名整形外科醫生所做調查結果、針對其中10名進行詳細電話訪談的結果、整形外科相關設備製造商的特色及定位、品質及優勢等。內容綱要摘記如下:

介紹及報告書概要

  • 概要
  • 評價目的
  • 樣本設計及發送
  • 評價及資料收集設計
  • 本報告書的閱讀方式

實施概要及主要調查結果

詳細的調查結果

  • 重要性
    • 影響產品選擇的重要考量因素
    • 重要考量因素的順位
  • 認知與合作
    • 與製造商的認知與合作
    • 主要產品
    • 主要製造商
  • 偏好
    • 最佳企業
    • 最差企業
    • 製造商表現排名
    • 考量事項別標準化的相對定位
    • 製造商別標準化的相對定位
    • 考量事項別製造商表現排名

結論

  • 建議
  • 分析提案

著者介紹/有效回答

目錄

Abstract

Introduction:

The results feature a summary of surgeons' perceptions regarding the importance of specific features in evaluating manufacturers, as well as the relative performance of featured manufacturers. The analysis includes a multivariate metric to compare the relative positioning of competing manufacturers. Also included is a positioning of competitive manufacturers based on the perceived strength of association with listed qualities.

The results of the data analyses indicate there are a number of leading companies currently servicing orthopedic surgeons, but none emerged as dominant. Each of the leading companies featured in the research is rated highest in one to three areas, but rated lower than competing companies in other critical areas. For instance, Arthrex is outstanding in the perceived quality of their products, but they are not rated as high as Zimmer in customer support, another critical consideration.

The information has applicability to advertising, sales, communications, product launches, forecasting, and strategic planning, as well as other business functions.

Methodology and Purpose of this Research

102 American Medical Association (AMA) board certified orthopedic surgeons were randomly selected from a list of 16,100 surgeons to participate in a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) featured on the internet. Upon completion of the SAQ, 10 of the participants were selected to participate in a follow-up depth interview conducted via the telephone.

The purpose of the study is to develop an overview of the perceived positioning of featured companies and the considerations associated with determining a company' s position.

Measurement Objectives

  • Importance of various considerations in determining product preferences
    • Rating of featured considerations
    • Importance weighting of various categories of considerations
      • Product quality
      • Pricing
      • Innovation
      • Training / Continuing education
      • Sales reps
      • Surgeon support / Customer service
      • Clinical data
      • Business assistance (marketing, advertising)
  • Manufacturer awareness and experience
    • Arthrex
    • ArthroCare
    • Biomet
    • ConMed / Linvatec
    • DePuy Orthopedics (J&J)
    • DePuy Mitek (J&J)
    • Encore
    • Ethicon
    • Smith & Nephew Orthopedics
    • Smith & Nephew Endoscopy
    • Stryker Orthopedic / Howmedica Osteonics
    • Stryker Biotech
    • Zimmer
    • Ortho Development
  • Measure overall perception of manufacturers (top-of-mind word associations)
    • First-to-mind product for various manufacturers (listed above)
    • Manufacturers associated with featured considerations
      • Traditional
      • Up and coming
      • Declining
      • Cutting edge
      • Flexible
      • Professional
      • Established
  • Measure manufacturers' relative positioning
    • Best medical device company overall
    • Worst medical device company overall
  • Measure overall perceived performance of featured companies (listed on previous page)
  • Measure perceived performance of featured companies on various considerations
    • Product quality
    • Pricing
    • Innovation
    • Training / Continuing education
    • Sales reps
    • Surgeon support / Customer service
    • Clinical data
    • Business assistance (marketing, advertising)
  • Identify market opportunities based on gaps in importance and perceived performance

Table of Contents

  • Introduction & Report Overview
    • Abstract
    • Measurement Objectives
    • Sample design and distribution
    • Measurement & Data Collection design
    • How to read this report
  • Executive Summary & Key Findings
  • Detailed Findings
    • I. Importance of various considerations for ortho surgeons in selecting product preference
      • a. Important considerations influencing product preferences for orthopedic surgeons
        • i. Product quality
        • ii. Pricing
        • iii. Innovation
        • iv. Training / Continuing education
        • v. Sales reps
        • vi. Surgeon support / Customer service
        • vii. Clinical data
        • viii. Business assistance (marketing, advertising)
      • b. Orthopedic Surgeons ratings of importance considerations
        • (1= No Importance...5= Very Important)
        • i. Product quality
        • ii. Pricing
        • iii. Innovation
        • iv. Training / Continuing education
        • v. Sales reps
        • vi. Surgeon support / Customer service
        • vii. Clinical data
        • viii. Business assistance (marketing, advertising)
    • II. Awareness & Associations of Orthopedic Surgery Product Manufacturers
      • a. Orthopedic Surgeons Awareness and experience with featured manufacturers
        • (Unaware)
        • (Aware but don' t use)
        • (Currently use)
        • (Used in the past but discontinued)
        • i. Arthrex
        • ii. ArthroCare
        • iii. Biomet
        • iv. ConMed / Linvatec
        • v. DePuy Orthopedics (J&J)
        • vi. DePuy Mitek (J&J)
        • vii. Encore
        • viii. Ethicon
        • ix. Smith & Nephew Orthopedics
        • x. Smith & Nephew Endoscopy
        • xi. Stryker Orthopedic / Howmedica Osteonics
        • xii. Stryker Biotech
        • xiii. Zimmer
        • xiv. Ortho Development
      • b. Top of mind products for featured manufacturers to orthopedic surgeons
      • c. For orthopedic surgeons, which manufacturer comes to mind given the following terms
        • i. Traditional
        • ii. Professional
        • iii. Established
        • iv. Flexible
        • v. Up and Coming
        • vi. Declining
        • vii. Cutting Edge
    • III. Orthopedic Surgeons Perceptions of Manufacturer Performance
      • a. Which of these companies is best overall according to orthopedic surgeons
        • i. Arthrex
        • ii. ArthroCare
        • iii. Biomet
        • iv. ConMed / Linvatec
        • v. DePuy Orthopedics (J&J)
        • vi. DePuy Mitek (J&J)
        • vii. Encore
        • viii. Ethicon
        • ix. Smith & Nephew Orthopedics
        • x. Smith & Nephew Endoscopy
        • xi. Stryker Orthopedic / Howmedica Osteonics
        • xii. Stryker Biotech
        • xiii. Zimmer
        • xiv. Ortho Development
      • b. Which of these companies is worst overall according to orthopedic surgeons
        • i. Arthrex
        • ii. ArthroCare
        • iii. Biomet
        • iv. ConMed / Linvatec
        • v. DePuy Orthopedics (J&J)
        • vi. DePuy Mitek (J&J)
        • vii. Encore
        • viii. Ethicon
        • ix. Smith & Nephew Orthopedics
        • x. Smith & Nephew Endoscopy
        • xi. Stryker Orthopedic / Howmedica Osteonics
        • xii. Stryker Biotech
        • xiii. Zimmer
        • xiv. Ortho Development
      • c. Manufacturer performance ratings on the following considerations
        • i. Product quality
        • ii. Pricing
        • iii. Innovation
        • iv. Training / Continuing education
        • v. Sales reps
        • vi. Surgeon support / Customer service
        • vii. Clinical data
        • viii. Business assistance (marketing, advertising)
      • d. Relative positioning ratings standardized by featured considerations
      • e. Relative positioning ratings standardized by featured manufacturer
      • f. Derived manufacturer performance ratings by featured considerations
  • Conclusions
    • Recommendations
    • Suggested Analysis
  • About the Author / Valid Results

Table of Figures

  • Figure A-1 Geographical Spread of Respondents
  • Table 1-1 Considerations Influencing Product Preferences
  • Table 1-2 Categories of Considerations Influencing Product Preferences
  • Figure 1-1 Top 3 Important Considerations (categorized)
  • Table 1-3 Importance of Considerations
  • Figure 1-2 90% Confidence Intervals Importance Means
  • Table 2-1 Company Product Experience
  • Table 2-2 Arthrex ? Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-3 ArthroCare Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-4 Biomet Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-5 ConMed / Linvatec Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-6 DePuy Orthopedics (J&J) Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-7 DePuy Mitek (J&J) Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-8 Encore Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-9 Ethicon Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-10 Smith and Nephew Orthopedics Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-11 Smith and Nephew Endoscopy Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-12 Stryker Orthopedic / Howmedica Osteonics Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-13 Stryker Biotech Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-14 Zimmer Top of Mind Product
  • Table 2-15 Ortho Development Top of Mind Product
  • Figure 2-1 Summary of Manufacturer and Product Associations
  • Table 2-16 Top of Mind Company
  • Table 2-17 Top of Mind Company continued
  • Figure 2-2 Relative Positioning of Various Companies
  • Table 3-1 Best Companies Overall
  • Table 3-2 Worst Companies Overall
  • Figure 3-1 90% Confidence Interval Overall Opinion Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-2 90% Confidence Interval Quality Mean Rating
  • Figure 3-3 90% Confidence Interval Pricing Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-4 90% Confidence Interval Innovation Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-5 90% Confidence Interval Training/Education Means Ratings
  • Figure 3-6 90% Confidence Interval Sales Rep Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-7 90% Confidence Interval Support Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-8 90% Confidence Interval Clinical Data Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-9 90% Confidence Interval Business Assistance Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-10 90% Overall Value Mean Ratings
  • Figure 3-11 Arthrex Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-12 ArthroCare Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-13 Biomet Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-14 ConMed / Linvatec Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-15 DePuy Orthopedics Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-16 DePuy Mitek Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-17 Encore Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-18 Ethicon Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-19 Smith and Nephew Orthopedics Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-20 Smith and Nephew Endoscopic Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-21 Stryker Orthopedics Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-22 Stryker Biotech Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-23 Zimmer Derived Performance
  • Figure 3-24 Ortho Development Derived Performance
Back to Top