首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>SICOT-J >Early treatment of open diaphyseal tibia fracture with intramedullary nail versus external fixator in Tanzania: Cost effectiveness analysis using preliminary data from Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute
【2h】

Early treatment of open diaphyseal tibia fracture with intramedullary nail versus external fixator in Tanzania: Cost effectiveness analysis using preliminary data from Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute

机译:坦桑尼亚使用髓内钉与外固定架早期治疗开放性干phy端胫骨骨折:使用Muhimbili骨科研究所的初步数据进行成本效益分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Introduction: Open tibia fractures are some of the most common types of Orthopedics injuries in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In Tanzania, open tibia fractures are treated either conservatively by prolonged cast or surgically by external fixation (EF) or intramedullary nail (IMN) when available. The cost of treatment and amount of time patients spend away from work are major economic concerns with prolonged casting and EF. The goal of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of IMN versus EF in the treatment of open diaphyseal tibia fractures at Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania).Methods: This is a prospective randomized control study conducted of patients with a closeable AO/OTA 42 open diaphyseal tibia fracture. The patients underwent surgical fixation with either IMN or EF at Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute (MOI), and were followed up at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively. A micro-costing method was used to estimate the fixed and variable costs of IMN and EF of the open diaphyseal tibial fracture.Results: The mean total cost per patient was lower for the IMN group ($425.8 ± 38.4) compared to the EF group ($559.6 ± 70.5, p < 0.001), with savings of $133.80 per patient for the IMN group. The mean hospital stay was 2.72 ± 1.40 days for the IMN group and 2.44 ± 1.47 days for the EF group (p = 0.5). Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.26 per patient for the IMN group and 0.24 in the EF group at 12 weeks (p = 0.8). Ninety-two percent of patients in the IMN group achieved fracture union versus 60% in the EF group at three months postoperatively (p = 0.03).Conclusion: IM nailing of a closeable open diaphyseal tibial fracture is more cost effective than EF. In addition, IM nailing has better union rates at three months compared to EF.
机译:简介:胫骨开放性骨折是中低收入国家(LMIC)最常见的骨科损伤类型。在坦桑尼亚,可以通过长时间的石膏保守治疗胫骨开放性骨折,或者在可行的情况下通过外固定架(EF)或髓内钉(IMN)进行手术治疗。长时间的铸造和EF,治疗的成本和患者花费在工作上的时间是主要的经济问题。这项研究的目的是确定Muhimbili骨科研究所(坦桑尼亚达累斯萨拉姆)的IMN与EF在治疗开放性干phy端胫骨骨折中的成本效益。方法:这是一项针对前瞻性随机对照研究的前瞻性随机对照研究。 AO / OTA 42开放性干open端胫骨骨折。患者在Muhimbili骨科研究所(MOI)接受IMN或EF外科手术固定,并在术后第2、6和12周进行随访。采用微成本法估算开放性干dia端胫骨骨折的IMN和EF的固定和可变成本。结果:与EF组相比,IMN组的平均每位患者平均总成本(425.8±38.4)美元更低( $ 559.6±70.5,p <0.001),IMN组每位患者节省$ 133.80。 IMN组的平均住院时间为2.72±1.40天,EF组的平均住院时间为2.44±1.47天(p = 0.5)。在12周时,IMN组的质量调整生命年(QALYs)为每名患者0.26,而EF组为0.24(p = 0.8)。术后三个月,IMN组中有92%的患者实现了骨折愈合,而EF组中则有60%(p = 0.03)。结论:IM钉闭合性开放性胫骨胫骨骨折比EF更具成本效益。此外,与EF相比,IM钉三个月的结合率更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号