Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Aug;13(4):391-399.
doi: 10.1007/s12178-020-09640-0.

Cost-Effectiveness of Operative Versus Non-Operative Treatment for Clavicle Fracture: a Systematic Literature Review

Gilber Kask  1 , Lauri Raittio  2 , Ville M Mattila  3   2 , Antti P Launonen  3
Affiliations
Review

Cost-Effectiveness of Operative Versus Non-Operative Treatment for Clavicle Fracture: a Systematic Literature Review

Gilber Kask et al. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose of review: Operative and non-operative treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures seems to yield comparative functional results. Furthermore, it has been suggested that surgery is more expensive compared with non-operative treatment of clavicle fracture. Cost-effectiveness seems to be more important in trends of treatment decisions. The purpose of this study is to investigate the cost-effectiveness of clavicle fracture treatment.

Recent findings: Seven publications were selected, and 5 studies showed that operative treatment is more expensive than non-operative treatment. The mean overall cost per person in discounted prices was 10,230 USD for operative and 7923 USD for non-operative treatment. The mean absence from work ranged 8-193 and 24-69 days for operative and non-operative treatment, respectively. Studies varied in methods of assessing the cost-effectiveness of treatment modalities. Based on this literature review, routine operative treatment seems to be more expensive. In some cases, operative treatment might be more cost-effective. In all studies, direct and indirect costs of health care were calculated, but a great heterogeneity exists in the sources of cost data between countries. The cost-effectiveness of the treatment of clavicle fracture depends strongly on the cost of operative treatment and length of absence from work. Cost-effectiveness analysis could be a routine in RCT studies in the future.

Keywords: Clavicle; Cost-effectiveness; Fracture; Treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram showing flow of studies retrieved for systematic review of operative versus non-operative treatment cost-effectiveness studies for clavicular fractures
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2002;11(5):452–456. doi: 10.1067/mse.2002.126613. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ballmer FT, Lambert SM, Hertel R. Decortication and plate osteosynthesis for nonunion of the clavicle. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 1998;7(6):581–585. doi: 10.1016/S1058-2746(98)90004-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boyer MI, Axelrod TS. Atrophic nonunion of the clavicle: treatment by compression plate, lag-screw fixation and bone graft. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1997;79(2):301–303. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.79B2.0790301. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Coupe BD, Wimhurst JA, Indar R, Calder DA, Patel AD. A new approach for plate fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures. Injury. 2005;36(10):1166–1171. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2005.03.007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(2):447–460. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00034. - DOI - PubMed