Dataset Information

Outcomes of nails versus plates for humeral shaft fractures: a Medicare cohort study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:This study was performed to determine (1) the incidence of humeral shaft fractures within the Medicare noncancer population, (2) the trends in utilization of humeral shaft fixation techniques by plate-and-screw devices and intramedullary nails, (3) differences in procedure times, and (4) the outcomes of individuals as measured by rate of secondary operations and 1-year mortality. DESIGN/SETTING:Retrospective comparative cohort analysis. A cancer-free Medicare part B claims sample derived from a 5% sample from the years 1993 to 2007 was analyzed. PATIENTS/INTERVENTION:Our cohorts were generated by diagnostic and procedural codes for humeral shaft fractures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT:The incidence of humeral shaft fracture and trend in operative fixation were evaluated for all years of data. Surgical times were assessed by anesthesia Current Procedural Terminology codes. Outcomes and complications were assessed by Current Procedural Terminology codes. The proportion of individuals experiencing complications and 1-year mortality were compared by proportion hazards. RESULTS:We identified 1385 claims for humeral shaft fractures over 15 years, with an adjusted rate of between 12.0 and 23.4 fractures per 100,000 beneficiaries. We identified 511 individuals who received surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures, 451 of whom had complete 1-year follow-up data. Nail fixation was more prevalent than plate fixation most years and had shorter anesthesia time by 27.1 minutes (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the complication rates between the 2 groups as measured by incidence of secondary operations and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Intramedullary nails are used for the majority of operative humeral shaft fractures among Medicare beneficiaries. Nailing has a shorter mean operative time. The 2 surgical techniques had no significant differences in terms of risk of secondary procedures and 1-year mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

SUBMITTER: Chen F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3399046 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes of nails versus plates for humeral shaft fractures: a Medicare cohort study.

Chen Foster F Wang Zhong Z Bhattacharyya Timothy T

Journal of orthopaedic trauma 20130201 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>This study was performed to determine (1) the incidence of humeral shaft fractures within the Medicare noncancer population, (2) the trends in utilization of humeral shaft fixation techniques by plate-and-screw devices and intramedullary nails, (3) differences in procedure times, and (4) the outcomes of individuals as measured by rate of secondary operations and 1-year mortality.<h4>Design/setting</h4>Retrospective comparative cohort analysis. A cancer-free Medicare part B cla ...[more]

PMID: 23343827

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHumeral shaft fractures constitute around 1% of adult fractures in the UK, with an annual incidence of approximately 13 per 100,000 population. Historically, these injuries have been primarily managed non-operatively, with operative fixation reserved for specific indications. Although some recent retrospective studies have suggested there are potential benefits of operative fixation over humeral bracing, there is a deficiency in level 1 evidence to support operative management as the primary treatment for humeral shaft fractures.Methods/designThis single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial aims to recruit 70 adult patients with an isolated closed fracture of the humeral diaphysis into one of two treatment arms: operative (n = 35) or non-operative (n = 35). The operative arm will undergo open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of the fracture using a standard fixation technique (plate and screws). The non-operative arm will be fitted with a prefabricated humeral brace until fracture union. All patients will be followed up for 1 year post-intervention. The primary outcome measure will be the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at 3 months post-intervention. Secondary outcome measures will include pain, treatment complications, return to work or sporting activities, shoulder and elbow range of motion, radiographic assessment, EuroQol (EQ-5D) Health Outcome score and 12-item Short Form (SF-12) Health Survey score. A health economic analysis will be performed to compare the cost implications of each treatment strategy.DiscussionThis randomised controlled trial will provide level 1 evidence comparing a standard ORIF technique against functional bracing for isolated closed humeral shaft fractures. The investigators hope that the study results will assist surgeons in their decision-making when managing patients with these injuries.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03689335 . Registered on 28 September 2018 (retrospectively).

Project description:BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fracture. The present meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN) and plating for humeral shaft fracture.MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Clinical Trails, Ovid, ISI Web of Science, and Chinese databases including WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched through March 10, 2019. The Review Manager software was adapted to perform statistical analysis and relative risk (RR) were used for the binary variables, and weighted mean difference and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to measure the continuous variables. Each variable included its 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 15 trials with 839 patients were included in the analysis. There was significant difference between IMN group and plate group in blood loss (SMD = 3.49, 95% CI: 1.19, 5.79, P = .003) and postoperative infections (RR = 3.04, 95% CI: 1.49, 6.24, P = .002). Additionally, significant difference was observed between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) group and IMN group in nonunion rate (RR = 3.20, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.84, P = .02). Statistical significance was also observed between the open reduction plate fixation group and IMN group in restriction of shoulder and elbow joints results (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.96, P < .05). No significant difference was observed for the operation time, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, nerve injury, delayed union, reoperation in either group.ConclusionIMN may be superior to plate in reducing blood loss and postoperative infections for the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, MIPO was superior to IMN group in nonunion and equal to IMN in other parameters. Further research is required and future studies should include analysis of assessments at different stages and follow-up after removal of the implants.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Humeral shaft fractures represent 1%-3% of all fractures and 20% of humeral fractures in adults. The treatment of these fractures is mainly conservative and operative treatment is usually reserved for specific circumstances. To date, no randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures with conservative treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will conduct an RCT to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. After providing informed consent, 80 patients from 18 years of age with humeral shaft fracture will be randomly assigned to open reduction and internal fixation with locking plate or conservative treatment with functional bracing. We will follow the patients for 10 years and compare the results at different time points. The primary outcome will be Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) at 12 months. The secondary outcomes will include Numerical Rating Scale for pain at rest and in activities, Constant Score and quality of life instrument 15D. Patients not willing to participate in the RCT will be asked to participate in a prospective cohort follow-up study, 'the declined cohort'. This cohort will be followed up at the same time points as the randomised patients to assess the potential effect of participation bias on RCT results and to enhance the external validity of the RCT. In one of the recruiting centres, all cooperative patients with humeral shaft fractures not eligible for randomisation will be asked to participate in a 'non-eligible cohort' study. We will use blinded data interpretation of the randomised cohort to avoid biased interpretation of outcomes. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically relevant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups. We will consider a difference of a minimum of 10 points in DASH clinically relevant. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The institutional review board of the Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District has approved the protocol. We will disseminate the findings of this study through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01719887; pre-results.

Dataset Information

Outcomes of nails versus plates for humeral shaft fractures: a Medicare cohort study.

Publications

Outcomes of nails versus plates for humeral shaft fractures: a Medicare cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets