Cost Analysis of Volar Plate Fixation Versus Plaster Cast Immobilization for Intra-Articular Distal Radial Fractures.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility between plaster cast immobilization and volar plate fixation for acceptably reduced intra-articular distal radial fractures. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing operative (volar plate fixation) with nonoperative (plaster cast immobilization) treatment in patients between 18 and 75 years old with an acceptably reduced intra-articular distal radial fracture. Health-care utilization and use of resources per patient were documented prospectively and included direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and indirect costs. All analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: The mean total cost per patient was $291 (95% bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval [bcaCI] = -$1,286 to $1,572) higher in the operative group compared with the nonoperative group. The mean total number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained at 12 months was significantly higher in the operative group than in the nonoperative group (mean difference = 0.15; 95% bcaCI = 0.056 to 0.243). The difference in the cost per QALY (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) was $2,008 (95% bcaCI = -$9,608 to $18,222) for the operative group compared with the nonoperative group, which means that operative treatment is more effective but also more expensive. Subgroup analysis including only patients with a paid job showed that the ICER was -$3,500 per QALY for the operative group with a paid job compared with the nonoperative group with a paid job, meaning that operative treatment is more effective and less expensive for patients with a paid job. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in QALYs gained for the operatively treated group was equivalent to an additional 55 days of perfect health per year. In adult patients with an acceptably reduced intra-articular distal radial fracture, operative treatment is a cost-effective intervention, especially in patients with paid employment. Operative treatment is slightly more expensive than nonoperative treatment but provides better functional results and a better quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Carpal Alignment: A New Method for Assessment.

Background Carpal alignment may be used as a tool to evaluate fracture reduction in patients with distal radius fractures. However, there is little consensus on how to measure and quantify carpal alignment. Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the inter- and intraobserver variability of a new perpendicular method with the existing method in fractured and unfractured wrists. Additionally, the normal distribution of carpal alignment in unfractured wrists was investigated. Patients and Methods Carpal alignment was assessed on lateral plain radiographs using two different methods, one described by Ng and McQueen and another newly proposed method, the perpendicular method. Using the perpendicular method, the observer draws one line along the inner rim of the volar cortex of the radius and one perpendicular line to the center of the capitate. The carpus is aligned when the line along the inner rim transects the center of the capitate. Three examiners measured the carpal alignment in 50 patients with nonfractured and 50 patients with fractured distal radius. Intra- and interobserver variability for both methods were determined. Results The interobserver coefficient for the perpendicular method was 0.98 and that for the Ng method was 0.86. The intraobserver coefficients for three examiners were 0.89, 0.62, and 0.63, respectively, for the Ng method. For the perpendicular method, the intraobserver variability was 0.96, 0.89, and 0.72, respectively. In patients with unfractured wrists, the mean perpendicular to the center of the capitate was 0.25 mm dorsally. Conclusion The new proposed method is a reproducible method for measuring carpal alignment with a high inter- and intraclass coefficient. Clinical Relevance This method of measurement allows for a reproducible technique for measuring carpal alignment.