The Cost of Intramedullary Nailing Versus Skeletal Traction for Treatment of Femoral Shaft Fractures in Malawi: A Prospective Economic Analysis
- 82 Downloads
In many low- and middle-income countries, non-surgical management of femoral shaft fractures using skeletal traction is common because intramedullary (IM) nailing is perceived to be expensive. This study assessed the cost of IM nailing and skeletal traction for treatment of femoral shaft fractures in Malawi.
We used micro-costing methods to quantify the costs associated with IM nailing and skeletal traction. Adult patients who sustained an isolated closed femur shaft fracture and managed at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Malawi were followed from admission to discharge. Resource utilization and time data were collected through direct observation. Costs were quantified for procedures and ward personnel, medications, investigations, surgical implants, disposable supplies, procedures instruments and overhead.
We followed 38 nailing and 27 traction patients admitted between April 2016 and November 2017. Nailing patient’s average length of stay (LOS) was 36.35 days (SD 21.19), compared to 61 (SD 18.16) for traction (p = 0.0003). The total cost per patient was $596.97 ($168.81) for nailing and $678.02 (SD $144.25) for traction (p = 0.02). Major cost drivers were ward personnel and overhead; both are directly proportional to LOS. Converting patients from traction to nailing is cost-saving up to day 23 post-admission.
Savings from IM nailing as compared with skeletal traction were achieved by shortened LOS. Although this study did not assess the effectiveness of either intervention, the literature suggests that traction carries a higher rate of complications than nailing. Investment in IM nailing capacity may yield substantial net savings to health systems, as well as improved clinical outcomes.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Elliot Marseille for developing the data collection tool for the time and motion analysis. We also acknowledge Foster Mbomuwa and Florence Zombeya for their extraordinary efforts in data collection.
- 7.Young S, Banza LN, Hallan G et al (2013) Complications after intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures in a low-income country: a prospective study of follow-up, HIV infection, and microbial infection rates after IM nailing of 141 femoral fractures at a central hospital in Malawi. Acta Orthop 84:460–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Young S, Beniyasi FJ, Munthali B et al (2012) Infection of the fracture hematoma from skeletal traction in an asymptomatic HIV-positive patient: Additional support for early surgical treatment of femoral fractures in people living with HIV in low-income countries? Acta Orthop 83:423–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Buxton RA (1981) The use of Perkins’ traction in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures. Bone Joint J 63:362–366Google Scholar
- 19.Kamau DM, Gakuu LN, Gakuya EM et al (2014) Comparison of closed femur fracture: skeletal traction and intramedullary nailing cost-effectiveness. East Afr Orthop J 8:4–9Google Scholar
- 20.Richland Technique Manual of SIGN IM Nail and Interlocking Screw System Insertion and Extraction Guide, 2012Google Scholar
- 22.Trust MCMS The Central Medical Stores Trust Catalogue, 2015Google Scholar
- 25.Budget USGsOoMa useful life and disposal value table, 2003Google Scholar
- 26.Converter XEC (2017). https://www.xe.com. Accessed 1 April 2017
- 27.StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. In: College Station TSL editor, 2013Google Scholar
- 29.Soren OO (2009) Outcome of surgical implant generation network nail initiative in treatment of long bone shaft fractures in Kenya. East Afr Orthop J 3:7–14Google Scholar
- 32.World Health O, World Health O Choosing interventions that are cost effective (WHO-CHOICE), 2010Google Scholar
- 33.World Health Organization Global Health expenditure database, 2014Google Scholar
- 36.Neumann M, Südkamp N, Strohm P (2014) Management of femoral shaft fractures. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cechoslov 82:22–32Google Scholar