scholarly journals Surgical treatment is not cost-effective compared to nonoperative treatment for displaced distal radius fractures in patients 65 years and over

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 1027-1034
Author(s):  
Sondre Hassellund ◽  
Zinajda Zolic-Karlsson ◽  
John Håkon Williksen ◽  
Torstein Husby ◽  
Jan Erik Madsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Life Years

Aims The purpose was to compare operative treatment with a volar plate and nonoperative treatment of displaced distal radius fractures in patients aged 65 years and over in a cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods A cost-utility analysis was performed alongside a randomized controlled trial. A total of 50 patients were randomized to each group. We prospectively collected data on resource use during the first year post-fracture, and estimated costs of initial treatment, further operations, physiotherapy, home nursing, and production loss. Health-related quality of life was based on the Euro-QoL five-dimension, five-level (EQ-5D-5L) utility index, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. Results The mean QALYs were 0.05 higher in the operative group during the first 12 months (p = 0.260). The healthcare provider costs were €1,533 higher per patient in the operative group: €3,589 in the operative group and 2,056 in the nonoperative group. With a suggested willingness to pay of €27,500 per QALY there was a 45% chance for operative treatment to be cost-effective. For both groups, the main costs were related to the primary treatment. The primary surgery was the main driver of the difference between the groups. The costs related to loss of production were high in both groups, despite high rates of retirement. Retirement rate was unevenly distributed between the groups and was not included in the analysis. Conclusion Surgical treatment was not cost-effective in patients aged 65 years and older compared to nonoperative treatment of displaced distal radius fractures in a healthcare perspective. Costs related to loss of production might change this in the future if the retirement age increases. Level of evidence: II Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1027–1034.

scholarly journals Operative Treatment of Intra-Articular Distal Radius Fractures With Versus Without Arthroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial RADAR-trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. S35-S36
Author(s):  
Caroline A. Selles ◽  
Marjolein A.M. Mulders ◽  
Joost W. Colaris ◽  
Mark van Heijl ◽  
Berry I. Cleffken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Arthroscopic debridement does not enhance surgical treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures: a randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline A. Selles ◽  
Marjolein A. M. Mulders ◽  
Joost W. Colaris ◽  
Mark van Heijl ◽  
Berry I. Cleffken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Arthroscopic Debridement ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Level Of Evidence

The aim of this study was to determine the difference in functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with and without arthroscopic debridement in adults with displaced intra-articular distal radius fractures. In this multicentre trial, 50 patients were randomized between ORIF with or without arthroscopic debridement. The primary outcome measure was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score. Secondary outcome measures were Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, pain scores, range of wrist motion, grip strength, and complications. Median PRWE was worse for the intervention group at 3 months and was equal for both groups at 12 months. The secondary outcome measures did not show consistent patterns of differences at different time-points of follow-up. We conclude that patients treated with additional arthroscopy to remove intra-articular hematoma and debris did not have better outcomes than those treated with ORIF alone. We therefore do not recommend arthroscopy for removal of hematoma and debris when surgically fixing distal radius fractures. Level of evidence: I

Analysis of variation in the surgical treatment of patients with distal radial fractures in the Netherlands

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. J. Walenkamp ◽  
M. A. M. Mulders ◽  
J. C. Goslings ◽  
G. P. Westert ◽  
N. W. L. Schep
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Distal Radial Fractures ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Explanatory Variables ◽  
Therapeutic Decisions ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Analysis Of Variation

The purpose of this study was to examine the variation in surgical treatment rates of patients with distal radius fractures across Dutch hospitals. We obtained all reimbursement data for the treatment of distal radius fractures for 2012 and 2013 categorized by hospital. The surgical rate across hospitals was corrected for possible explanatory variables using linear regression analyses. We analysed a total of 95,754 reimbursements. The operative rate ranged from 0% to 23%, with a mean of 9.6%. Hospital type, the percentage of females, the percentage of patients over 65, the mean age, average socioeconomic status and the total number of patients treated explained only 2.6% of the observed differences in the operative rate among hospitals in 2012 and 11.6% in 2013. Our results suggest that subjective factors, such as surgeon’s opinions and preferences, significantly influence therapeutic decisions in patients with distal radius fractures. Level of evidence: III

Predictors of Management of Distal Radius Fractures in Patients Aged >65 Years

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472110172
Author(s):  
Amanda Walsh ◽  
Nelson Merchan ◽  
David N. Bernstein ◽  
Bailey Ingalls ◽  
Carl M. Harper ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Distal Radius ◽  
Operative Management ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Total N ◽  
Fracture Characteristics ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Comorbidity Index

Background Treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) in patients aged >65 years is controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify what patient and fracture characteristics may influence the decision to pursue surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in patients aged >65 years sustaining a DRF. Methods We queried our institutional DRF database for patients aged >65 years who presented to a single academic, tertiary center hand clinic over a 5-year period. In all, 164 patients treated operatively were identified, and 162 patients treated nonoperatively during the same time period were selected for comparison (total N = 326). Demographic variables and fracture-specific variables were recorded. Patient and fracture characteristics between the groups were compared to determine which variables were associated with each treatment modality (operative or nonoperative). Results The average age in our cohort was 72 (SD: 11) years, and 274 patients (67%) were women. The average Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 4.1 (SD: 2.1). The CCI is a validated tool that predicts 1-year mortality based on patient age and a list of 22 weighted comorbidities. Factors associated with operative treatment in our population were largely related to the severity of the injury and included increasing dorsal tilt (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.12; P < .001) and AO Classification type C fractures (OR, 5.42; 95% CI, 2.35-11.61; P < .001). Increasing CCI was the only factor independently associated with nonoperative management (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.997; P = .046). Conclusion Fracture severity is a strong driver in the decision to pursue operative management in patients aged >65 years, whereas increasing CCI predicts nonoperative treatment.

Operative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in Patients With Parkinson Disease

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472110289
Author(s):  
Anthony L. Logli ◽  
Marco Rizzo
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Time To Failure ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Locked Plating

Background: Owing to the many unique disease characteristics of Parkinson disease (PD)—namely resting tremors, muscular rigidity, and poor bone quality—we hypothesized that this patient population would have inferior outcomes with surgical management of acute distal radius fractures (DRFs) compared with the literature available on the general population. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study performed at a single, level 1, academic center from 2001 to 2020 capturing all adult patients with an isolated, acute, and closed DRF that ultimately underwent operative treatment. International Classification of Diseases 10 codes were used to identify 30 patients for manual chart review. Several patient and fracture characteristics were accounted for and complications, reoperations, and failures of surgical intervention were recorded. Results: There was a total of 7/30 failures (23%), 6/30 reoperations (20%), and 12 complications in 9/30 wrists (complication rate, 30%) at a mean latest follow-up of 11 months (1.2-158 months). Of the 7 failures, 5 were due to loss of reduction, and 2 of them were deep infections with mean time to failure of 8.3 weeks (range, 11 days-5.2 months). Conclusions: This study found a high rate of complications, reoperations, and early failure despite a short follow-up period and a small cohort of patients with PD treated surgically for a DRF. We recommend locked plating if suitable for the fracture type and early involvement of a multidisciplinary team to assist with medical optimization of PD to increase chances of a successful outcome.

Intra-articular distal radius fractures in elderly patients: a randomized prospective study of casting versus volar plating

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Martinez-Mendez ◽  
Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla ◽  
Joaquin de-Juan-Herrero
Keyword(s):  
Conservative Treatment ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Articular Surface ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Volar Plating ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Loss Of Reduction

We compared outcomes in elderly patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures treated by closed reduction and plaster immobilization or open reduction and internal fixation with a volar plate. Ninety-seven patients older than 60 years were randomly allocated to conservative (47 patients) or surgical (50 patients) treatment. Over a 2-year period, we assessed patient-rated wrist evaluation score, DASH (disability arm, shoulder and hand) questionnaire, pain, wrist range of motion, grip strength, and radiological parameters. The functional outcomes and quality of life were significantly better after volar plating fixation compared with conservative treatment. We found that restoration of the articular surface, radial inclination, and ulnar variance affected the outcomes, but the articular step-off did not. Twenty-five per cent of the patients with conservative treatment had secondary loss of reduction. We conclude that surgical plating leads to better outcomes than conservative treatment for elderly patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures. Level of evidence: I

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document