Continued physician and practice consolidation, the advancement of AI and reimbursement from the physician fee schedule are among the top trends that orthopedic leaders expect to dominate the conversation this year.
These six orthopedic surgeons and executives recently connected with Becker’s to share what they believe will be the most important themes to follow in the industry.
Note: Responses were lightly edited for clarity and length.
Question: What do you believe will be the defining trends/themes for the orthopedic industry in 2026?
Michael Doyle. Vice President, Orthopedic Services of Heartland Orthopedic Specialists (Alexandria, Minn.): The physician fee schedule is a major concern in our practice. The historic slide of reimbursement while being matched with a continuous increase in expenses is at a crossroads. Increasing administrative processes from prior authorization to meeting medical necessity to down coding and denials will continue to strain the system already facing financial shortfalls. Staffing shortages continue to affect our facility. I think this will continue to push the discovery and hopeful implementation of AI to improve efficiencies.
Kimble Jenkins. CEO of OrthoSouth (Memphis, Tenn.): Last July, MIT published a study titled, “The GenAI Divide: State of AI in Business 2025.” That study reported that 95% of organizations are getting zero return from their AI deployments. There wasn’t a low ROI, there was no ROI. McKinsey, among others, published similar studies.
Deploying AI within an organization is not like buying Outlook licenses. An organization can’t simply “bolt on” AI, as McKinsey points out. A successful AI deployment requires a thorough, purposeful process, run by multiple stakeholders within an organization. A successful AI deployment requires not just technological changes, but also significant workflow changes and changes in how the practice is managed.
As KPMG US CEO Tim Walsh said, “It’s now about managing not only humans, but AI agents within a workflow. I might have had 10 humans in a workflow, now it is five humans and five AI agents that all need oversight and review…” 2025 was largely a year of AI hype and relentless, aggressive sales pitches. I believe 2026 will be the year where a handful of practices will mount the necessary effort and begin to deploy AI in ways that meaningfully improve the patient experience, practice workflows, physician and administrative productivity, and as a consequence produce a real, measurable ROI.
Donna Kurek. Chief of Quality and Patient Experience at OrthoVirginia (Richmond): From my perspective, there are several themes that will shape orthopedics. First, AI that delivers measurable improvements in care quality. I feel AI will shift from experimentation to practical use, with organizations prioritizing tools that reduce variation, support earlier diagnosis, and improve postoperative monitoring. At OrthoVirginia, we’re focused on AI applications that directly enhance reliability and the patient experience.
Second, continued migration toward outpatient, efficiency‑focused surgical care. Advances in minimally invasive techniques and anesthesia will continue to push procedures into ambulatory settings. The emphasis will be on refining pathways that deliver predictable outcomes, tighter coordination and a smoother patient journey.
Third, personalization built on accurate, actionable quality data. The next phase of personalization depends on data integrity. Many practices still struggle with inconsistent or incomplete data, limiting their ability to benchmark outcomes or tailor care. OrthoVirginia is prioritizing cleaner, more reliable data capture so clinicians can trust the metrics guiding risk prediction, performance evaluation, and individualized care planning.
Fourth, workforce redesign to address demand and rising clinician burnout. Musculoskeletal demand continues to grow while clinicians face increasing administrative burden and burnout. Practices will expand APC roles, streamline workflows and adopt digital tools that reduce friction for both patients and providers. At OrthoVirginia, we are actively working to align tools, resources and operational support to reduce burnout and create a more sustainable clinical environment. Team‑based models and smarter workflow design are essential to protecting access, preserving quality, and supporting clinician well‑being.
Fifth, value‑based care moving into operational reality. As bundled payments and outcomes‑based arrangements mature, organizations will invest in standardized pathways, longitudinal care models, and robust patient‑reported outcomes. For OrthoVirginia, this shift aligns goals around functional recovery, patient experience, and long‑term musculoskeletal health.
Emeka Nwodim, MD. Orthopedic and Spine Surgeon at The Centers for Advanced Orthopaedics (Bethesda, Md.): A trend that I believe will be worth paying attention to in 2026 is the transition of physicians and practices across the country to either hospital/health system acquisition, private equity or large consolidated groups. Recognizing there are pros and cons to each of those entities, I believe that more evidence will show favorable outcomes for both providers and patients with the large consolidated groups that are physician-owned and physician-led.
Michael Piver. Vice President, Orthopedic Services of Ballad Health (Johnson City, Tenn.): I believe continued consolidation of orthopedic practices either by health systems, MSOs between orthopedic groups or PE acquisitions will continue in 2026. I think that the emergence of AI in the revenue cycle space both on the collection front as well as improving the pre-authorization process and denial management will continue to grow as orthopedic practices try to squeeze every dollar they can from insurance companies.
Michael Stauff, MD. Orthopedic Spine Surgeon and Chair, Department of Orthopedics and Physical Rehabilitation of UMass Chan Medical School (Worcester, Mass.): The growing challenges associated with preauthorization for elective procedures in orthopedics. This will directly impact access to procedures that help pain and disability in patients when their surgery is denied or delayed because of a payer’s blanket application of criteria for surgical indications. On the practice side, it has led to a significant increase in administrative time and burden for the staff in a department or practice. For the surgeon, the additional time associated with peer-to-peer reviews, additional charting and miscellaneous items comes at a cost as well.
