Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of acute fixation versus conservative management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. The secondary aim was to conduct a sensitivity analysis of patient characteristics that may influence a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY).
A CEA was conducted from a randomised control trial comparing conservative management (n=92) to acute plate fixation (n=86) of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to express the cost per QALY. The short form 6-dimensional (SF-6D) score was the preference based index to calculate the cost per QALY.
The 12-month SF-6D advantage of acute fixation over conservative management was 0.0085 (p=0.464) with a mean cost difference of £4,096.22 and resultant ICER of £481,908.24/QALY. For a threshold of £20,000/QALY the benefit of acute fixation would need to be present for 24.1 years. Linear regression analysis identified nonunion as the only independent factor to influence the SF-6D at 12-months (p<0.001). Conservatively managed fractures that resulted in a nonunion (n=16) had a significantly worse SF-6D compared to acute fixation (0.0723, p=0.001) with comparable healthcare cost at 12-months (£170.12 difference). Modelling the ICER of acute fixation against those complicated by a nonunion proved to be cost effective at £2,352.97/QALY at 12-months.
Routine plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures is not cost-effective. Patients with nonunion after conservative management have increased morbidity with comparable expense to those undergoing acute fixation which suggests targeting these patients is a more cost-effective strategy.
