Comparison of Direct Perioperative Costs in Treatment of Unstable Distal Radial Fractures

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As the United States transitions to value-based insurance, bundled payments, and capitated models, it is paramount to understand health-care costs and resource utilization. The financial implications of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with a volar locking plate for management of unstable distal radial fractures have not been established. We aimed to elucidate cost differences between ORIF and closed reduction and percutaneous pinning (CRPP). Our hypothesis was that ORIF has greater direct perioperative costs than CRPP but that the costs equilibrate over time. METHODS: We reviewed financial data for 40 patients prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo CRPP or ORIF for treatment of a closed, displaced, unstable distal radial fracture. Clinical and functional outcomes, hospital-associated direct perioperative costs, postoperative care and therapy costs, and costs for additional procedures were compared. Cost data were stratified into perioperative, 90-day, and 1-year periods, and were reported utilizing cost ratios (CRs) relative to the CRPP cohort. Statistical analysis was performed with chi-square and independent-samples t tests with an alpha level of <0.05. RESULTS: Seventeen patients underwent CRPP and 23 underwent ORIF with a volar plate. Patients who underwent ORIF incurred greater 90-day (CR = 2.03/1.0, p < 0.001) and 1-year (CR = 1.60/1.0, p < 0.001) direct costs than those who underwent CRPP. The differential was greatest in the immediate perioperative period and gradually decreased over time. Operating room fees (CR = 1.7/1.0, p < 0.001), operating room implants, anesthesia (CR = 1.8/1.0, p < 0.001), and total perioperative costs (CR = 2.7/1.0, p < 0.001) were significantly greater in the ORIF cohort. Rehabilitation and cast technician costs were comparable (CR = 0.9/1.0 [ORIF/CRPP], p = 0.69). At 1 year, the CR for all costs of decreased to 1.6/1.0 (ORIF/CRPP, p < 0.001). Compared with the CRPP cohort, the ORIF cohort demonstrated significantly better functional outcomes at 6, 9, and 12 weeks and similar outcomes at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: ORIF for a displaced, unstable distal radial fracture incurred greater direct costs than CRPP. Although implant costs for ORIF provided the greatest cost differential, additional procedures and higher clinic costs in the CRPP cohort narrowed the 90-day and 1-year cost gaps. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.