+1 (502) 904-2126   One Westbrook Corporate Center, Suite 300, Westchester, IL 60154, USA   Site Map
ISSN: 2574 -1241

Impact Factor : 0.548

  Submit Manuscript

Research ArticleOpen Access

Conservative Vs Operative Management of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fracture: A Comparative Study

Volume 11 - Issue 1

Gyanendra Kumar Jha1*, Pravin Timsina2, Deepesh Yadav2, Suman Lamichhane2 and Shweta Jha3

  • Author Information Open or Close
    • 1Consultant Orthopaedics Surgeon, Sagarmatha Zonal Hospital, Nepal
    • 2Department of Orthopaedics, College of Medical Sciences, Nepal
    • 3Medical Officer, Nagarik Community Hospital, Nepal
    • *Corresponding author: Gyanendra Kumar Jha, Consultant Orthopaedics Surgeon, Sagarmatha Zonal Hospital Rajbiraj Saptari, Nepal

Received: November 01, 2018;   Published: November 15, 2018

DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2018.11.002051

Full Text PDF

To view the Full Article   Peer-reviewed Article PDF


Background: Clavicle fracture is one of the common fractures accounting for 2.6-12% of all fractures and 44-66% of shoulder fractures with midclavicle fracture accounting for 80% of clavicle fractures. Most of the clavicles were treated conservatively in past but recently there has been an increasing tendency for operative management of clavicle fractures. With studies done showing varying results it is not clear whether primary surgical management provides any better results than conservative management. So, this study was carried out to compare the radiological and functional outcome following conservative management to that of operative management with plating for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Methods: In a single center, prospective clinical trial, 60 patients with displaced midshaft fracture of the clavicle were systematically randomized (alternate patient) into either operative treatment with plate fixation or nonoperative treatment with clavicle brace and sling. Outcome was analysed in terms of functional outcome and radiological union by standard follow-up, Constant and Murley shoulder score and plain radiographs. All sixty patients completed sixmonth follow up and there was no difference between two groups with respect to patient demographics, mechanism of injury and fracture pattern.

Result: There was no significant difference in Constant shoulder score between the two groups. The mean time of union was 14.57 weeks in operative group compared to 16.04 weeks in nonoperative group (p value=0.191). There were two nonunion in nonoperative group compared to none in operative group. The complications in operative group were mainly hardware related (four had loosening of screw, two had implant failure and one had infection). At six months after surgery patient were more likely to be satisfied with the results in operative group compared to nonoperative group (p=0.02).

Conclusion: Six months after a displaced midshaft clavicular fracture, nonoperative treatment resulted in higher malunion and nonunion rate but similar functional outcome and union time compared to operative management. However, patients were more likely to be satisfied in operative group compared to nonoperative group.

Introduction| Materials and Methods| Result| Complications| Discussion| Conclusion| References|