Dataset Information

Variation in management of humeral and clavicular shaft fractures amongst fellowship trained orthopedic traumatologists.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:There exists a wide variety of opinions on the appropriate management of diaphyseal humeral and clavicular fractures amongst orthopedic surgeons. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a preference amongst orthopedic traumatologists on treatment of diaphyseal humerus and clavicle fractures with respect to various patient populations. METHODS:A 6-question survey was created using Surveymonkey.com and distributed via the Orthopedic Trauma Association (OTA) website to fellowship trained orthopedic surgery traumatologists to survey the preferred management of a simple oblique middle 1/3rd diaphyseal humerus fracture and a middle 1/3rd displaced diaphyseal clavicle fracture in the following 3 clinical settings: a healthy laborer, an older patient with co-morbidities, and if the surgeon themselves sustained the injury. The ratio of operative to non-operative management was calculated for all 6 questions. A chi-square value was performed to determine if the results are clinically significant based on the clinical scenario. RESULTS:There was 56 responses to the survey that were included in the analysis. Overall, there was a statistically significant trend towards surgical management of the surgeon's own diaphyseal humerus fractures (55%) compared to that of healthy patients (41%) and those with medical comorbidities (21%) (p?=?0.02) A similar trend was noted for operative management for diaphyseal clavicle fractures by the surgeon on their own fractures (43%) compared to that of healthy patients (38%) and those with medical comorbidities (18%) (p?=?0.02). CONCLUSION:While there are an increasing number of relative indications for treatment of diaphyseal humerus shaft and clavicle fractures, the results of this survey indicate that fellow-ship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeons prefer surgical management of simple humerus and clavicular fractures in young, healthy patients as well as in themselves.

SUBMITTER: Sharareh B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7499960 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Variation in management of humeral and clavicular shaft fractures amongst fellowship trained orthopedic traumatologists.

Sharareh Behnam B Perkins Christopher C

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20200918 1

<h4>Background</h4>There exists a wide variety of opinions on the appropriate management of diaphyseal humeral and clavicular fractures amongst orthopedic surgeons. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a preference amongst orthopedic traumatologists on treatment of diaphyseal humerus and clavicle fractures with respect to various patient populations.<h4>Methods</h4>A 6-question survey was created using Surveymonkey.com and distributed via the Orthopedic Trauma Association (OTA) ...[more]

PMID: 32948174

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis 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/settingRetrospective 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/interventionOur cohorts were generated by diagnostic and procedural codes for humeral shaft fractures.Main outcome measurementThe 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsIntramedullary 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.

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:BACKGROUND:Although most humeral nonunions are successfully treated with a single procedure, some humeral nonunions are more difficult to heal and require multiple procedures. Current literature does not provide evidence describing how the prognosis for surgical repair in patients who develop humeral diaphyseal nonunions may be affected by initial operative versus nonoperative treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:The purpose of this study was to assess whether operative versus nonoperative treatment of acute humeral shaft fractures impacts outcome of subsequent repairs of humeral nonunions (NU) including the need for additional surgery and a comparison of pain relief (Visual Analogue Scale for pain) and functional outcome (Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment). METHODS:Thirty-four patients with humeral shaft nonunion were evaluated of which 15 patients had been treated operatively (OF), and 19 patients had been treated nonoperatively (NO) for their initial humerus shaft fracture. All patients underwent plating with autogenous bone graft or allograft ± bone morphogenic protein (BMP) 2 or 7 as their final NU repair surgery prior to healing. We compared functional outcome and pain for both cohorts and determined risk factors for requiring more than 1 nonunion repair surgery. RESULTS:The mean time of final follow-up was 14.7?±?10.4 months. Thirty-three of 34 NUs (97.1%) healed. Patients who underwent OF of their original fracture were more likely to require more than 1 NU repair surgery (66.7 vs. 0%, p?<?0.01). Of the 15 patients who underwent initial OF, 33.0% required 1 NU surgery, 33.0% required 2 NU surgeries, and 33.0% required 3 NU surgeries. Patients who underwent initial OF were more likely to require >6 months to achieve union (40.0 vs. 10.5%, p?=?0.04). At final follow-up, there was no difference in functional outcome or pain scores. Initial OF was the only independent predictor of needing more than 1 NU repair surgery (OR 70.1 CI 2.8-1762.3) to achieve healing. CONCLUSION:Humeral shaft nonunions following initial operative fixation of the index fracture is more resistant to achieving union when compared to nonunions forming after initial nonoperative treatment. When final healing is achieved, there is no difference in function or pain.

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.

Dataset Information

Variation in management of humeral and clavicular shaft fractures amongst fellowship trained orthopedic traumatologists.

Publications

Variation in management of humeral and clavicular shaft fractures amongst fellowship trained orthopedic traumatologists.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets