Ivan Tornos: Yes, sure. I can do that as well. So I think Suky alluded to the trauma headwinds that we had in the quarter. We had some supply challenges. And obviously, you got the comp in China versus a year ago. Here in the U.S., there were some contracts that we lost about a year ago. We’re anniversarying out of those. There were some product launches that were delayed, ’22 and ’23 that are coming out now. So I will say that moving forward, given the better comps or U.S. and the contract capabilities now in the U.S. along with innovation, the trauma business is going to be in a better position. Foot and ankle has been one of the businesses, frankly, within S.E.T. that we didn’t prioritize. We wanted to prioritize upper extremities, SportsMed and CMFT.
That being said, I do think there is a couple of product launches that are going to make a difference in the space. So all in all, I do think you’ll see better performance. But trauma, foot and ankle are not the key priorities within S.E.T.
Bryan Hanson: Yes. And to be clear, it doesn’t mean that we don’t see foot and ankle, trauma and restorative therapies as potentially attractive markets. It’s just we want to be disciplined in the way that we’re going to invest — and the — if you look at the strat plans that we have for upper extremity, CMFT and Sports, they’re very attractive. So we’re going to focus our investment there. Out at the end of the day, the individuals running foot and ankle, trauma or restorative therapies, put a plan in place that’s attractive, they could become growth drivers. But today, we want to differentiate those growth drivers to non-growth drivers, nothing against any other categories. It’s just the plan right now is very attractive in those 3.
Ivan Tornos: And just on restorative therapy, that was restorative therapies was part of your question, but we anniversary out of the reimbursement change, July of 2023. So you should expect that business to do dramatically better now.
Michael Matson: All right. Got it. And then just in terms of the supply chain issues, I don’t know if it’s possible, but is there any way you could quantify the impact either to your revenue growth and/or your margins in the quarter?
Bryan Hanson: I think we’ll try to stay away from quantifying, it’s pretty challenging, actually, because when you talk about supply issues, you always get feedback from the field on what could have happened if you had more supply and you’ve got to make sure that you’re kind of sifting through what’s real, what’s not. But the fact is it is a governor for us right now, and that’s why we continue to say it. What’s important, though, is it’s a macro-challenge. There’s not a company in orthopedics right now that is not being impacted by supply challenges. So it’s impacting everyone. AAOS just did a survey actually with surgeons asking this question and across the board regardless of who they were using, they were experiencing supply challenges.
Really important thing for us that’s built into the guidance that Suky just provided. So that’s key. But when I think about that growth driver, the impact it’s having on our ability to grow. I think it’s important to look at that. That means is getting in the way of our team using new innovation to drive mix benefit and competitive conversions. We truly do believe that it was not a factor. We’d be getting more mix benefit, we’ll be getting more competitive conversions because the demand is there. So it’s frustrating. We have great momentum in the business, great innovation and supply is in the way of driving that growth. And we believe it’s going to continue to be there for a period of time.
Operator: We’ll go next to Robbie Marcus with JPMorgan.
