ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews2024
Outcomes of Name-brand Versus Generic Cephalomedullary Nail Fixation for Intertrochanteric and Subtrochanteric Fractures: A Matched Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare 90-day and 6-month outcomes and implant costs of intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric fracture fixation using cephalomedullary nails (CMNs) from a single name-brand company to fixation using generic CMNs. This was a retrospective matched cohort study. All CMN procedures for a single surgeon in a single US metropolitan institution from 2021 to 2022 were identified using current procedural terminology codes. Nearest neighbor 1:1 matching was conducted between the name-brand and generic cohorts controlling for (1) age, (2) American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and (3) Charlson Comorbidity Index. A total of 50 patients were successfully matched (25 namebrand versus 25 generic). The average implant cost per case for the name-brand group was $3,587 versus $1,615 for the generic group. Cost of disposables averaged $109 for the generic implant sets versus $916 for the name-brand (P < 0.001). Overall, a cost savings of 61% could be generated per case with the use of generic implants and disposables. Fixation of intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures using generic CMNs produces similar outcomes compared with using name-brand CMNs for approximately half the implant cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.