Comparison of patient reported outcomes following clavicle operative fixation using supraclavicular nerve sparing and supraclavicular nerve sacrificing techniques- A cohort study.
Clavicle
Fracture
Nerve sparing
Patient reported outcomes
Supraclavicular nerve
Journal
Injury
ISSN: 1879-0267
Titre abrégé: Injury
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0226040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
03
08
2020
revised:
26
10
2020
accepted:
26
10
2020
pubmed:
3
11
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
2
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Supraclavicular nerve injury is one of the common complications after clavicle open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) affecting up to 55% of patients. There is debate about whether sparing supraclavicular nerves improves functional outcomes and patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to compare numbness, patient-reported outcomes and surgical time in patients undergoing clavicle ORIF using supraclavicular nerve sparing and supraclavicular nerve sacrificing techniques. We conducted a retrospective cohort study with prospective survey of 108 patients with clavicular fractures treated with ORIF at a level 1 trauma centre. Patients were divided into two groups: 1) ORIF with supraclavicular nerve sparing techniques and 2) ORIF with supraclavicular nerve sacrificing techniques. Questionnaires were conducted and subjective numbness around supraclavicular nerve distribution was our primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures included the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score, a numeric rating scale for pain and satisfaction with treatment and surgical time. An overall response rate of 92% was achieved with an average follow-up of 16 months. There were 20 patients in the supraclavicular nerve sparing group and 79 patients in the supraclavicular nerve sacrificing group. 76% of all patients experienced numbness post-operatively and 91% of these patients experienced persistent numbness at final follow-up. There was no significant difference between the groups for age, gender, time to follow-up and mechanism of injury. Patients in the supraclavicular nerve sparing group had significantly less numbness at final follow-up (35% vs 86%, P < 0.001; OR=0.21 95%CI 0.11-0.40). There was no significant difference in the QuickDASH score nor the NRS for pain and function. Sparing supraclavicular nerves did not result in a significantly longer operation. Our study demonstrates that identification and protection of the supraclavicular nerves result in significantly less numbness following clavicle ORIF but does not affect patient reported functional outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33131791
pii: S0020-1383(20)30923-2
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.10.100
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
501-505Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest None