Cost Comparison of Kirschner Wire Versus Intramedullary Screw Fixation of Metacarpal and Phalangeal Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Intramedullary screw fixation is a relatively new technique for fixation of metacarpal and phalangeal fractures. The objective of this study was to compare health care-associated costs and outcomes for intramedullary screw versus Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation of hand fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing intramedullary screw fixation of hand fractures at a single center during 2016-2019 inclusive was conducted. Health care-associated costs were compared with age-matched and fracture pattern-matched controls who underwent K-wire fixation. RESULTS: Fifty patients met the study inclusion criteria, incorporating 62 fractures (29 K-wire, 33 intramedullary screw fixation). The median age was 34.6 years (18.0-90.1 years). There was no significant difference in primary operative costs (£1130.4 ± £162.7 for K-wire vs £1087.0 ± £104.2 for intramedullary screw), outpatient follow-up costs (£958.7 ± £149.4 for K-wire vs £782.4 ± £143.8 for intramedullary screw), or total health care-associated costs (£2089.1 ± £209.0 for K-wire vs £1869.4 ± £195.3 for intramedullary screw). However, follow-up costs were significantly lower for the uncomplicated intramedullary screw cohort (£847.1 ± £109.1 for K-wire vs £657.5 ± £130.8 for intramedullary screw, P = .05). Subgroup analysis also revealed that overall costs were significantly higher for buried K-wire techniques. Complication rates, time to return to active work, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were similar. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified significantly lower outpatient follow-up costs for uncomplicated intramedullary screw fixation of hand fractures compared with K-wires, along with a trend toward lower overall health care-associated costs. In addition, buried K-wire techniques were also found to carry a significantly higher financial burden. Higher powered prospective studies are required to determine indirect costs.