Construct Choice for the Treatment of Displaced, Comminuted Olecranon Fractures: are Locked Plates Cost Effective?

BACKGROUND

Cost effective implant selection in orthopedic trauma is essential in the current era of managed healthcare delivery. Both locking and non-locking plates have been utilized in the treatment of displaced fractures of the olecranon. However, locking plates are often more costly and may not provide superior clinical outcomes. The primary aim of the present study is to assess the clinical and functional outcomes of olecranon fractures treated with locked and non-locking plate and screw constructs while providing insight into the cost of various implants.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of a single institution database identifying Mayo IIB type olecranon fractures treated surgically from 2003 to 2012. All fractures were treated with either a locked plate or a one-third tubular hook plate construct. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated. Minimum 6-month follow-up was required. Outcomes were compared between fixation constructs, including rate of union, early failure, postoperative range of motion, and complication rates. Statistical analysis included Pearson's Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, and the Student's ttest for continuous variables.

RESULTS

The one-third tubular construct was equivalent to locking plate constructs with respect to union, post-operative range of motion, and rates of complications. There were no early or late failures. Locking plates were associated with a relative cost increase of $1,263.50 compared to the one-third tubular hook plate per case.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons should consider the cost of implants when treating Mayo IIB olecranon fracture. In this cohort, one-third tubular plates provided equivalent outcomes to locked plates with a notable decrease in cost.