When it comes to perioperative supply chain management, few categories are more complex—or riskier—than Physician Preference Items (PPI). These high-cost implants and surgical supplies are critical to patient care, yet notoriously difficult to track, standardize, and reconcile. The reason? Procurement processes are often informal, manual, and heavily influenced by surgeon preference.
While hospitals and health systems have made strides in standardizing other categories of spend, PPI remains a blind spot, especially in the operating room. In this post, we’ll explore five of the most common compliance challenges in perioperative procurement—and why solving them requires a smarter, more automated approach.
1. Lack of Standardized Documentation
One of the most immediate barriers to compliance is the absence of a consistent, standardized documentation process for PPI. Implant data is often captured manually—if at all—by circulating nurses, vendor reps, or perioperative staff. That leads to:
-
Missing implant logs
-
Conflicting information across systems (EHR, billing, supply chain)
-
Delays in case reconciliation
Without a clean paper trail, hospitals expose themselves to coding errors, billing disputes, and failed audits.
2. Off-Contract Purchasing Driven by Surgeon Preference
By definition, Physician Preference Items are selected at the discretion of the surgeon. While clinical autonomy is essential, it can lead to purchases that bypass hospital contracts and negotiated pricing. This “rogue spend” drives:
-
Contract leakage
-
Vendor non-compliance
-
Higher cost per case
Without guardrails in place, surgeon-driven purchasing can undermine even the most strategic sourcing initiatives.
3. Inadequate Case Capture at the Point-of-Use
The OR is a high-stakes, fast-paced environment—not an ideal setting for manual data entry. As a result, the implant items used during surgery are often:
-
Documented after the fact
-
Captured inaccurately
-
Missed entirely
This leads to data gaps that delay billing, hinder inventory management, and complicate revenue cycle reconciliation. The longer the delay, the greater the compliance risk.
4. Limited Oversight of Vendor Behavior in the OR
Many hospitals still rely on vendor representatives to bring in products, support the case, and report usage. But without a system of checks and balances, this model invites risk:
-
No oversight of what was brought in vs. what was used
-
Inconsistent usage logs
-
Potential for overbilling or unapproved substitutions
Hospitals need more than trust—they need transparency and traceability.
5. Delayed and Manual Bill-Only Reconciliation
Bill-only items are often reconciled days or even weeks after the procedure. That lag time increases the risk of:
-
Pricing errors
-
Misaligned PO data
-
Inaccurate billing to payers
A retrospective, paper-heavy process is no match for today’s compliance standards—or the scale of today’s implant spend.
The Compliance Cure: Real-Time, Automated PPI Management
These challenges aren’t new—but they are solvable. Hospitals that automate perioperative procurement workflows can close the compliance gap while improving speed, accuracy, and cost control. With the right solution, you can:
-
Standardize implant documentation at the point-of-use
-
Enforce contract compliance automatically
-
Gain real-time visibility into vendor activity and usage
-
Accelerate reconciliation and billing timelines
Perioperative procurement doesn’t have to be a black box. With automation and accountability, hospitals can transform PPI management from a liability into a strategic advantage.
Want to See It in Action?
Learn how Kermit helps hospitals take control of implant spend, drive compliance, and eliminate contract leakage—all from one platform.