Recent findings from a researcher in the Naveen Jindal School of Management showcase the significant influence of hospital advertisements on the frequency of robotic surgical procedures. The study, co-authored by Dr. Tongil (TI) Kim of the Jindal School and Tae Jung Yoon from the KAIST College of Business in South Korea, has been featured in the Journal of Marketing, highlighting the pivotal role of marketing in the healthcare sector’s adoption of advanced medical technologies.

The paper — “The Role of Advertising in Patients’ Choice of High-Tech Medical Procedures: A Study on Robotic Surgery” — investigates the influence of advertising on patients’ preferences for high-tech medical procedures, particularly robotic surgery.

“There is a bit of an arms race going on between hospitals to see which one can buy the best robotics,” Kim said. “We see promotions and advertising for medical procedures and medications frequently, and we became curious about the effect of advertising on whether patients choose to have robotic surgery.”

Although studies show that hospital advertising has grown more than fivefold in the past two decades, the topic has been understudied, according to Kim. He believes theirs is the first study of the effects of advertising robotic surgeries. Kim and Yoon’s research led them to analyze approximately 140,000 individual patient records as well as television advertising data from Florida from 2011 through 2015.

The research shows that advertising increases the number of robotic surgery procedures, especially among Medicaid patients, who typically have lower incomes.The shorter hospital stays associated with robotic surgery may be a factor influencing patients’ choice of procedure. However, the study found that robotic surgery does not provide any long-term health benefits over other types of surgery. Additionally, robotic surgery is more expensive, which means that the impact of advertising robotic surgery differs among patients, healthcare providers, insurance providers, surgical robot manufacturers and policymakers.

While patients can be influenced by advertising, they may not receive enough information about the pros and cons of a procedure from the ads. The study suggests there may be a need for increased transparency in healthcare advertising to better inform patients about the benefits and risks of different medical procedures, Kim said.

According to this study, though the cost of robotic surgery is high, it can provide benefits to hospitals and other healthcare providers; however, to attract patients, advertising strategies should be designed while keeping in mind the specific needs and preferences of various patient groups.The study also suggests that manufacturers can consider cooperative advertising with hospitals as a business-to-business marketing strategy to expand their market and build brand recognition.

The study examined whether advertisements promote robotic surgery and did not investigate other aspects of these ads. Further research could explore the effectiveness of different hospital content in advertising hightech procedures. Kim and Yoon’s study mainly focused on how patients respond to advertising without considering how hospital competition and patient reception can affect this response. They suggest that future research should address these issues to better understand patients’ choices regarding robotic surgery.

While the effect of robotic surgery advertising is generally positive for other stakeholders, it is a different story for insurance companies, depending on longand short-term health outcomes and costs. In addition, the higher cost of robotic surgery is also a higher cost for insurance coverage, meaning advertising of the robotic surgery possibly can contribute to rising premiums for consumers.

“For patients, as long as their out-of-pocket costs don’t go up, shorter hospital stays would be a good choice,” Kim said. “The higher costs would benefit the hospital as well, so advertising could be a good thing.”