Becker's Spine Review

27 PRACTICE MANAGEMENT Q: What are the benefits of partnering with a management services organization like USOP over other strategic options such as affiliations with a hospital, health system, payer or other entity? GY: ere are a couple of things that attract practices to our MSO type of model. What we hear time and time again is that this option allows for them to maintain their brand identity, clinical autonomy and a level of income that they're accustomed to. It allows them resources over a fairly broad network that's more broadly defined, whether that's the ability to tap into payer or employer opportunities, hospital partnerships or individual de novo opportunities for that practice — those are all still on the table. Our type of model gives practices the opportunity to come together, have the benefits of consolidation — being part of a larger network — but still as this is playing out, be able to leave on the table what those other consolidation methods offer them. Oentimes those decisions are locking practices into one silo, which dictates the direction they're moving in — whether it's aligning with a payer or hospital system, which then takes away from some of those other opportunities that you might still want on the table. Q: How do you see consolidation with private equity groups developing in the coming years? GY: I think there are a number of misnomers that private equity contin- ues to battle. For example, the consolidation that occurred under private equity direction in the late 1990s/early 2000s really was not successful, but a lot has changed since then in terms of structure and strategy. Q: To what do you attribute the lack of success in the late 1990s/early 2000s? GY: There were a couple of factors. No. 1 is the growth oppor- tunity that practices had. Whether that's in the outpatient space, partnerships with payers in a bundled arrangement, ancillaries, vertical integration opportunities, those were not on the table to the degree and to the openness of the opportunities today. I would also say that the structures of the late 1990s/early 2000s private equity era were not generally committed structures, which is what these MSOs are. Essentially, you could get in the group, get out of the group, change your affiliation, and this meant that it was more unstable than today's MSO structures, which bears full commitment from the partners moving forward under the USOP umbrella, allowing more stability for the platform than you would have generally seen with the other form of physician management models in the late 1990s. Q: What does the next year look like for USOP? GY: We're in the process of expanding our footprint and based on our growth over the last year, current interest level and the discussions we're having with practices, we anticipate doubling in size in the next 12 months. We feel that we have something very special that allows us to attract practices like ASMOC and we're looking forward to grow- ing and continuing to build this orthopedic platform. n SPIRA-L O P E N M A T R I X L L I F R SPIRA-O O P E N M A T R I X O L I F R SPIRA O P E N M AT R I X A L I F R Surface By Design Patented Open Architecture Arched Design Proven Osteopromotive Surface* Engineered surface with average pore diameter of 500 µm provides conductive scaffold for celluar adhesion and migration.* Proprietary surface yields signcantly higher bony ingrowth at faster rates as compared to PEEK.* We've Got You Covered From Every Angle CA M B E R M E D T E C H . C O M Camber Spine L I F E U P R I G H T R

• Cover