Recent research has shown that the Experience Curve can be used to describe price trends associated with medical devices, and that these trends are consistent with those observed in other sectors. This paper presents data obtained from 20 medical device case studies that were found to have Experience Curve slopes of between 65 and 98 per cent. Statistically significant correlations have been established between the slope of the Experience Curve and the corresponding market conditions and product characteristics such as the length of time since the product first gained market approval and the market revenue growth rate. The potential predictive nature of these data is discussed in relation to the corresponding product lifecycle. Importantly, this research reports, for the first time, a two-phase Experience Curve for medical device products, where the rate of price decrease changes at a point in time in response to a definable market variable. The implications of such two-phase Experience Curves and the various market conditions that might trigger this behaviour are discussed with regard to the possible impact on healthcare product marketing strategies. As such, these findings demonstrate the value of the Experience Curve relationship to those developing, selling and purchasing healthcare technologies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CooksonR.HuttonJ. (2003). Regulating the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices: A European perspective. Health Pol.63(2), 167–178.
2.
HendersonB. D. (1974). The experience curve — reviewed I. The concept. Perspectives, 124, 1–2.
3.
HendersonB. D. (1974). The experience curve — reviewed V. Price stability. Perspectives, 149, 1–3.
WrightT. P. (1935). Factors affecting the cost of airplanes. J. Aeronaut. Sci.3, 275–282.
7.
AlchianA. (1963). Reliability of progress curves in airframe production. Econometrica31(4), 679–693.
8.
DayS. G.MontgomeryB. D. (1983). Diagnosing the experience curve. J. Market. 47(2), 44.
9.
HendersonB. D. (1984). The application and misapplication of the experience curve. J. Bus. Strat.4(3), 3–9.
10.
LiebermanM. B. (1984). The learning curve and pricing in the chemical processing industries. Rand J. Econ.15(2), 213.
11.
ZimmermanM. B. (1982). Learning effects and the commercialization of new energy technologies: The case of nuclear power. Bell J. Econ.13(2), 297.
12.
BrownA.MeenanB. J.YoungT. P. (2007). Marketing innovation: Medical device prices follow the experience curve. J. Med. Market. 7(3), 203–212.
13.
BrownA.MeenanB. J.YoungT. P. (2007). Price trend analysis and its implications for the development of new medical technologies. Proceedings of the 29th International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, 23–26 August, IEEE.
14.
HBS Consulting (2006). Pricing strategies: The outlook for medical device and diagnostic companies, HBS Consulting Ltd., London.
15.
DayG. S. (1981). The product life cycle: Analysis and application issues. J. Market. 45, 60–67.
16.
CoxW. E. (1967). Product life cycles as marketing models. J. Bus.40(4), 375–384.
17.
SwanJ. E.RinkD. (1982). Fitting market strategy to varying product life cycles. Bus. Horizons, January-February: 72–76.
18.
DhallaN. K.YuspehS. (1976). Forget the product life cycle concept!. Harvard Bus. Rev., January-February: 102–112.
19.
MercerD. A. (1993). Two-decade test of product life cycle theory. British J. Manage. 4, 269–274.
20.
LambkinM.DayG. S. (1989). Evolutionary processes in competitive markets: Beyond the product life cycle. J. Market. 53(3), 4–20.
21.
GolderP. N.TellisG. J. (2004). Growing, growing, gone: Cascades, diffusion, and turning points in the product life cycle. Market. Sci.23(2), 207–218.
BodenheimerT. (2005). High and rising health care costs. Part 2: Technologic innovation. Ann. Intern. Med.142(11), 932–937.
24.
NeumannP. J.RosenA. B.WeinsteinM. C. (2005). Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis. N. Engl. J. Med.353(14), 1516–1522.
25.
AppeltP.HauserT. (2006). Prescribing innovations: A practical framework for effective marketing of medical device innovations. J. Med. Market. 6(3), 195–202.
SchnellerE. S. (2000). The value of group purchasing in the health care supply chain, School of Health Administration and Policy, Tempe.
29.
SuchO. (2007). From idea to product — why so many innovations in healthcare wilt on the way to commercialization. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS. 23–26 August, IEEE.
30.
KaplanA. V.BaimD. S.SmithJ. J.FeigalD. A.SimonsM.JefferysD.FogartyT. J.KuntzR. E.LeonM. B. (2004). Medical device development. From prototype to regulatory approval. Circulation109, 3068–3072.
31.
DixonD.BrownA.MeenanB. J. (2006). Experiences of new product development in the medical device industry. Medical Device Technol.17(3), 20–22.
32.
DixonD.EatockJ.MeenanB. J.MorganM. (2006). Application of design of experiment (DOE) techniques to process validation in medical device manufacture. J. Validat. Technol.12(2), 92–100.
33.
FDA (1997). Deciding when to submit a 510(k) for a change to an existing device, Federal Drug Adminstration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville, Available at http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ode/510kmod.html.
34.
ShawB. (1985). The role of the interaction between the user and the manufacturer in medical equipment innovation. R&D Manage. 15(4), 283–292.
35.
RochfordL.RudeliusW. (1997). New product development process. Stages and successes in the medical products industry. Ind. Market. Manage. 26, 67–84.
