Dataset Information

Variation in the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in the United States: 2010 to 2015.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:It remains unknown whether treatment trends for distal radius fracture have changed in light of value-based care initiatives during recent years. The authors aimed to characterize modern practice patterns for distal radius fracture management. METHODS:Truven MarketScan databases from 2009 to 2015 were used to extract demographic characteristics, geographic location, and comorbidities for patients receiving treatment for a distal radius fracture. Regression modeling and Joinpoint analysis were used to assess treatment trends and the association of patient factors with treatment provided. RESULTS:Among 499,766 eligible encounters, the rate of internal fixation fluctuated around 13 percent. Casting/splinting remained the most frequent treatment across all populations. Treatment trends varied by age; children and adolescents almost exclusively received closed treatment (mean, 97 percent), yet rates of internal fixation increased among adults and elderly patients. Patients aged 55 to 64 years were most likely to undergo internal fixation (OR, 1.89; 95 percent CI, 1.82 to 1.96). Higher median household income also significantly increased odds of receiving internal fixation (p < 0.001). Despite declining rates of external fixation and percutaneous pinning, regional variations among surgical modalities persist. CONCLUSIONS:The increased use of internal fixation for distal radius fractures may be slowing. Treatment type continues to differ widely across demographic groups, underscoring the need for standardization. In accordance with value-based care initiatives, treatment decisions should be made to combine patient needs with financial implications on the health system. Comparative effectiveness data to derive optimal management strategies are still warranted.

SUBMITTER: Huetteman HE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6311711 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Variation in the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in the United States: 2010 to 2015.

Huetteman Helen E HE Shauver Melissa J MJ Malay Sunitha S Chung Ting-Ting TT Chung Kevin C KC

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 20190101 1

<h4>Background</h4>It remains unknown whether treatment trends for distal radius fracture have changed in light of value-based care initiatives during recent years. The authors aimed to characterize modern practice patterns for distal radius fracture management.<h4>Methods</h4>Truven MarketScan databases from 2009 to 2015 were used to extract demographic characteristics, geographic location, and comorbidities for patients receiving treatment for a distal radius fracture. Regression modeling and ...[more]

PMID: 30589789

Similar Datasets

Project description:Although annual mortality trends for prostate cancer were stabilized in recent years, understanding the exact treatment changes is necessary for optimal management. Utilization of not-otherwise specified (NOS) treatments for prostate cancer was unclear. Thus, this study aimed to analyze trends in treatment for prostate cancer in the U.S. from 2010 to 2015 and examine whether the treatment for the prostate cancer in the U.S. is compliant with clinical practice guidelines. Using joinpoint regression models, we examined trends in the rate and proportion of age-standardized utilization (ASUR and ASUP) of treatments for prostate cancer diagnosed during 2010-2015 in the U.S. based on the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER, 2018 data-release, with linkage to active surveillance/watchful waiting [AS/WW]) cancer registry program. Among 316,690 men with prostate cancer diagnosed during 2010-2015, ASUR and ASUP for radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy, AS/WW and NOS treatment were 32.7, 34.4, 10.0 and 40.1 per 100,000, and 27.9%, 29.3%, 8.5% and 34.2%, respectively. Trends in the overall ASUR for prostate cancer treatments differed by cancer risk group, patients' age, race/ethnicity, Gleason score, insurance status, and the average education level, average poverty-level and foreign-born person percentage of the patient's residence-county, but not by rural-urban continuum or region. ASUP of radical prostatectomy decreased from 9.8% in 2010 to 4.8% in 2015 (annual percent change [APC] = -12.0%, 95% CI, -15.9 to -7.9%), and the decrease was observed in all different risk groups. ASUP of AS/WW increased from 16.4% in 2010 to 30.2% in 2013 (APC = 22.7%, 95% CI, 4.6 to 44.0%) and then remained stable through 2013 to 2015 (APC = 1.9%, 95% CI, -24.1 to 36.9%). The increasing tendency of AS/WW only occurred in the low-risk and intermediate-risk groups. The ASUP of NOS treatment has increased from 32.3% in 2010 to 36.8% in 2015 (P<0.01). In conclusion, ASUR and ASUP for prostate cancer treatments, including NOS treatment, had changed during 2010-2015. Their trends appeared to differ by cancer risk-group, age, race/ethnicity, Gleason score and socioeconomic factors. Future studies are warranted to understand the impacts of upward trends in ASUP of NOS treatments and AS/WW on patient survival and prostate cancer mortality.

Project description:ImportanceNo consensus has been reached to date regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures. The international rate of operative treatment has been increasing, despite higher costs and limited functional outcome evidence to support this shift.ObjectivesTo compare functional, clinical, and radiologic outcomes after operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures in adults.Data sourcesThe PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched from inception to June 15, 2019, for studies comparing operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting on the following: acute distal radius fracture with operative treatment (internal or external fixation) vs nonoperative treatment (cast immobilization, splinting, or bracing); patients 18 years or older; and functional outcome. Studies in a language other than English or reporting treatment for refracture were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed in September 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measures included medium-term functional outcome measured with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the overall complication rate after operative and nonoperative treatment.ResultsA total of 23 unique studies were included, consisting of 8 RCTs and 15 observational studies, that described 2254 unique patients. Among the studies that presented sex data, 1769 patients were women [80.6%]. Overall weighted mean age was 67 [range, 22-90] years). The RCTs included 656 patients (29.1%); observational studies, 1598 patients (70.9%). The overall pooled effect estimates the showed a significant improvement in medium-term (?1 year) DASH score after operative treatment compared with nonoperative treatment (MD, -5.22 [95% CI, -8.87 to -1.57]; P?=?.005; I2?=?84%). No difference in complication rate was observed (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]; P?=?.87; I2?=?62%). A significant improvement in grip strength was noted after operative treatment, measured in kilograms (MD, 2.73 [95% CI, 0.15-5.32]; P?=?.04; I2?=?79%) and as a percentage of the unaffected side (MD, 8.21 [95% CI, 2.26-14.15]; P?=?.007; I2?=?76%). No improvement in medium-term DASH score was found in the subgroup of studies that only included patients 60 years or older (MD, -0.98 [95% CI, -3.52 to 1.57]; P?=?.45; I2?=?34%]), compared with a larger improvement in medium-term DASH score after operative treatment in the other studies that included patients 18 years or older (MD, -7.50 [95% CI, -12.40 to -2.60]; P?=?.003; I2?=?77%); the difference between these subgroups was statically significant (test for subgroup differences, P?=?.02).Conclusions and relevanceThis meta-analysis suggests that operative treatment of distal radius fractures improves the medium-term DASH score and grip strength compared with nonoperative treatment in adults, with no difference in overall complication rate. The findings suggest that operative treatment might be more effective and have a greater effect on the health and well-being of younger, nonelderly patients.

Dataset Information

Variation in the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in the United States: 2010 to 2015.

Publications

Variation in the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in the United States: 2010 to 2015.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure