Nicholas J Zarkadis1, Emmanuel D Eisenstein2, Nicholas A Kusnezov2, John C Dunn2, James A Blair2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, TX, USA. Electronic address: nickzarkadis@gmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, TX, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses have failed to collectively favor either open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) or intramedullary nailing (IMN) fixation. The purpose of our investigation was to elucidate the optimal decision between ORIF and IMN for acute traumatic operative humeral shaft fractures through an expected value decision analysis. METHODS: We performed an expected value decision analysis and sensitivity analysis to elucidate the difference between ORIF and IMN fixation for patients with acute traumatic humeral shaft fractures. We surveyed 100 consecutive, randomly selected volunteers for their outcome preferences. Outcomes included union, delayed union, major complications, minor complications, and infection. A literature review was used to establish probabilities for each of these respective outcomes. A decision tree was constructed and a fold-back analysis was performed to find an expected patient value for each treatment option. RESULTS: The overall patient expected values for ORIF and IMN were 12.7 and 11.2, respectively. Despite artificially decreasing the rates of major complications, infection, delayed union, and nonunion each to 0% for IMN fixation (sensitivity analysis), ORIF continued to maintain a greater overall patient expected value (12.7 vs. 11.4, 11.2, 11.2, and 12.1, respectively). Only if the rate of nonunion after ORIF was increased from 6.1% to 16.8% did the overall expected outcome after ORIF equal that of IMN (11.2). CONCLUSION: Our expected value decision analysis demonstrates that patients favor ORIF over IMN as the optimal treatment decision for an acute traumatic humeral shaft fracture. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses have failed to collectively favor either open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) or intramedullary nailing (IMN) fixation. The purpose of our investigation was to elucidate the optimal decision between ORIF and IMN for acute traumatic operative humeral shaft fractures through an expected value decision analysis. METHODS: We performed an expected value decision analysis and sensitivity analysis to elucidate the difference between ORIF and IMN fixation for patients with acute traumatic humeral shaft fractures. We surveyed 100 consecutive, randomly selected volunteers for their outcome preferences. Outcomes included union, delayed union, major complications, minor complications, and infection. A literature review was used to establish probabilities for each of these respective outcomes. A decision tree was constructed and a fold-back analysis was performed to find an expected patient value for each treatment option. RESULTS: The overall patient expected values for ORIF and IMN were 12.7 and 11.2, respectively. Despite artificially decreasing the rates of major complications, infection, delayed union, and nonunion each to 0% for IMN fixation (sensitivity analysis), ORIF continued to maintain a greater overall patient expected value (12.7 vs. 11.4, 11.2, 11.2, and 12.1, respectively). Only if the rate of nonunion after ORIF was increased from 6.1% to 16.8% did the overall expected outcome after ORIF equal that of IMN (11.2). CONCLUSION: Our expected value decision analysis demonstrates that patients favor ORIF over IMN as the optimal treatment decision for an acute traumatic humeral shaft fracture. Published by Elsevier Inc.