What Are the Functional Outcomes and Pain Scores after Medial Clavicle Fracture Treatment?

Medial clavicle fractures are uncommon, occurring in older and multiply injured patients. The management of these fractures and the factors that predispose toward poor outcomes are controversial. Furthermore, the functional outcomes of treatment are not well characterized or correlated with fracture patterns. (1) To determine minimum 1-year functional outcomes using QuickDASH scores and pain scores after medial clavicle fractures and (2) to identify factors associated with these outcome variables. In an institutional review board-approved, retrospective study, we identified adult patients with medial clavicle fractures at two tertiary care referral centers in a single metropolitan area in the United States from January 2010 to March 2019. Our initial query identified 1950 patients with clavicle fractures, from which 74 adult patients with medial clavicle fractures and at least 1 year of follow-up were identified. We attempted to contact these eligible patients by telephone for functional outcomes and pain scores. Twenty-six patients were deceased according to the most recent Social Security Death Index data and public obituaries, three declined participation, and 14 could not be reached, leaving 42% of the total (31 of 74) and 65% (31 of 48) of living patients included in the analysis. Demographic characteristics, fracture characteristics, and clinical and radiographic union as assessed by plain radiography and CT were collected through record review. Twenty-nine patients were treated nonoperatively and two patients underwent open reduction internal fixation. Sixty-eight percent (21 of 31) of the included patients also had radiographic follow-up at least 6 weeks postoperatively; two patients had persistent nonunion at a mean of 5 ± 3 years after injury. Our primary response variable was the QuickDASH score at a minimum of 1 year (median [range] 5 years [2 to 10]). Our secondary response variable was the pain score on a 10-point Likert scale. A bivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with these response variables. The following explanatory variables were studied: age, gender, race, dominant hand injury, employment status, manual labor occupation, primary health insurance, social deprivation, BMI, diabetes mellitus, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, Charlson Comorbidity Index, nonisolated injury, high-energy mechanism of injury, nondisplaced fracture, fracture comminution, superior-i