Cost-effectiveness analysis of locking nail compared with locking plate for displaced 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures: a secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing the Multiloc nail and PHILOS plate.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies show no clear difference in functional outcomes between locking nails and plates for proximal humerus fractures (PHFs). Economic evaluations provide valuable insights into cost-effectiveness to guide healthcare decisions. We aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis based on a semidouble-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing nailing and plating for displaced 3- and 4-part PHFs with 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

79 patients with displaced 3- or 4-part PHFs were randomized to undergo open reduction and internal fixation using either a nail or a plate. Patients were followed for 2 years, with costs tracked for the index surgery, hospital stay, additional healthcare services, and secondary procedures. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using EQ-5D, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare treatments.

RESULTS

38 patients in each group were eligible for analysis. Mean total costs were €21,654 (standard deviation [SD] 10,448) for nails and €16,374 (SD 3,886) for plates, with a mean difference of €5,296 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1,989-8,603). Extra costs for reoperations and other non-regular follow-ups were €3,746 (SD 10,448) for nails and €265, (SD 1,217) for plates, resulting in a mean difference of €3,480 (CI -868 to 7,829) extra costs for nails. The mean QALY showed no statistical difference between groups of 0.09 (CI -0.003 to 0.17) (1.65 in the nail group and 1.74 in the plate group).

CONCLUSION

Plates were more cost-effective compared with nails but did not result in a statistically significant difference in QALY.