Related Experiment Videos
Metallic or absorbable fracture fixation devices. A cost minimization analysis
1Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
|August 1, 1996
Summary
Absorbable fixation devices offer potential cost savings by eliminating removal surgery. However, their financial advantage over metallic implants depends on the fracture type and the rate of hardware removal.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedic surgery
- Biomaterials science
- Health economics
Background:
- Absorbable polyester pins and screws are available for internal fixation of small fragment fractures.
- A key advantage is the elimination of implant removal procedures, potentially reducing costs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct a cost analysis comparing absorbable internal fixation devices with conventional metallic devices.
- To determine the financial viability of absorbable implants based on fracture types and removal rates.
Main Methods:
- A cost analysis including medical care and lost work time was performed.
- Data from 994 patients using absorbable devices and 1173 patients using metallic devices were analyzed.
- Fracture types included ankle (uni- and trimalleolar), olecranon, and metacarpal fractures.
Main Results:
- Using absorbable implants could save $410-$903 per patient if metallic hardware removal is included.
- The break-even removal rate for absorbable devices to be more cost-effective varies by fracture type (19%-54%).
Conclusions:
- Absorbable devices are not universally more cost-effective than metallic implants at current prices.
- Financial favorability is contingent on specific fracture types and the necessity of hardware removal procedures.