Employers are asking the same question: Why do MSK costs keep rising?
Self-insured employers collectively spend over $380 billion annually on musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. 50% of working Americans suffer from MSK-related issues. Yet, despite investing in care navigation, digital MSK solutions, and Centers of Excellence (COEs), costs continue to rise.
For orthopedic groups, understanding the employer’s perspective isn’t optional—it’s table stakes for building meaningful relationships. The days of waiting for referrals are gone. If orthopedic CEOs want to remain relevant in an employer-driven healthcare landscape, they need to understand where MSK costs come from, how employers think about them, and where orthopedic practices fit in this evolving system.
But here’s the challenge: employers don’t think about MSK care the same way orthopedic providers do. If orthopedic groups want to build strong employer partnerships, they must shift their mindset—from being a service provider to being a strategic partner.
Employers face an overwhelming challenge with MSK-related costs. These conditions now account for ~30% of employer healthcare spending, a figure that continues to climb year over year.
The financial burden is split between two major categories:
Most MSK-related spending falls into three primary categories:
Despite their efforts, employers aren’t seeing the cost reductions they expected. Instead, they’re dealing with:
In response to these ongoing frustrations, an ecosystem of employer-driven MSK solutions has emerged, each attempting to solve the problem through different approaches.
Many employers don’t fully understand how independent orthopedic groups can fit into their cost-containment strategies—because most orthopedic practices haven’t positioned themselves as a proactive solution. So how can orthopedic groups become an integral part of the employer MSK conversation rather than an overlooked player?
It starts with rethinking employer partnerships.
For too long, orthopedic groups have passively processed referrals without understanding where they come from. That mindset must change.
Employers aren’t just another source of patient volume—they are potential long-term partners. And partnerships are built on mutual value.
Jumping straight into a direct contract is like proposing marriage on the first date. Employers rarely commit to formal agreements without seeing clear value first. Instead, orthopedic groups should start by offering structured access pathways that generate data and demonstrate impact.
Examples of Structured Access Pathways:
These offerings provide a low-friction way to engage employers while simultaneously gathering critical data to build a business case for a formal partnership.
Employers don’t make decisions based on clinical quality alone—they need financial proof. Once an orthopedic practice has engaged with an employer through structured access, the next step is leveraging data to create a compelling business case. What employers care about:
To take this conversation to the next level, orthopedic CEOs must speak in the employer’s language—framing their value in terms of cost control, workforce retention, and health plan optimization.
Independent orthopedic groups have an advantage here. Unlike national digital MSKs, they are deeply integrated into their local communities. Employers trust local, high-quality care—but orthopedic practices must proactively position themselves to be part of the employer’s healthcare strategy, not just a reactive service provider.
Employers are strategic buyers. Their decision-making process revolves around cost containment, workforce productivity, and access to high-quality care.
Orthopedic groups that fail to understand this will struggle to find their place amidst a growing ecosystem of digital MSKs, COEs, Direct Primary Care and care navigation platforms.
The key to success lies in:
Orthopedic care isn’t disappearing—but the way employers engage with it is evolving.
Those who take action now will own the next era of employer-driven MSK care. Those who wait will find themselves outside the employer’s decision-making process.