Patient-reported outcomes of adolescents with tibia shaft fractures: comparison of closed reduction and casting vs. elastic stable intramedullary nailing

Abstract

Tibial shaft fractures are the third most common pediatric long bone fractures. Closed reduction and casting (CRC) is considered initial treatment in this population, however, surgical management using elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) is also used in adolescents. This study compared patient-reported outcomes in a cohort of adolescents with tibia fractures treated with ESIN or CRC. This single-center retrospective study gathered adolescent patients 10–18 years of age with closed tibia shaft fractures between the years 2015 and 2021 treated by either CRC or ESIN. Measured outcomes include patient demographics, overall casting time, time to full weight bearing, time to full healing, radiographic healing, complications (loss of reduction, malunion >5° and >10°) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. A total of 141 patients (68% male) were included, with 31 receiving ESIN and 110 having CRC. Patient demographics were similar across groups. At follow-up, CRC had a significant shorter time to healing (11 vs. 15 weeks), but an increased casting duration (7 vs. 4 weeks). Finally, the ESIN group had significantly greater pre-intervention angulation, displacement, and shortening. In both interventions, mobility and pain interference scores showed significant improvements from baseline (2 weeks post-op) at 12, 16, and 24 weeks. No statistically significant differences were noted between CRC and ESIN groups across PROMIS domains of pain interference and mobility. CRC and ESIN are effective in improving pain and mobility in adolescent diaphyseal tibia fractures, but neither intervention is superior based on PROMIS scores at 12, 16 and 24+ weeks. From a patient standpoint, we demonstrate that neither treatment is superior in achieving better-perceived mobility or decreasing pain sooner. Level of Evidence: Level III.