CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01199653Updated Sep 13, 2010

Study Comparing Plate Stabilization to Conservative Treatment in Midshaft Clavicle Fractures

A Phase 2/3 interventional study of Operative treatment and Non-operative treatment with arm immobilised to a sling in Clavicle and Fracture, sponsored by Helsinki University Central Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Finland. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 70 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2010-09-13.

Sponsored by Helsinki University Central Hospital · Phase 2/3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 2/3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 70 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to find whether to operate or treat conservatively dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures.

Read the detailed description

Midshaft clavicle fractures are common comprising 2% of all fractures and 35% to 45% of all shoulder girdle injuries in adults. Old-established treatment practices, based on no randomised controlled trials, are used for clavicle fractures. By tradition, midshaft clavicle fractures have been treated conservatively with arm immobilized to a sling for few weeks. The goal of treatment is to restore painless function of the upper extremity.

There have been some recommendations for operative treatment, such as skin compromising in fracture area, open fracture, floating shoulder, neurovascular symptoms in upper extremity, or multiple injuries. Recently, increasing interest has emerged in the surgical treatment.

02

Conditions studied

  • Clavicle
  • Fracture

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • clavicle fractures
  • midshaft
  • dislocated
  • operative treatment
  • conservative treatment
  • non-operative treatment
  • randomized controlled trial
  • bone plates
03

In context

Fractures, Bone

2,261 studies on the registry are indexed under Fractures, Bone; 325 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 60 is below the median of 69 across 1,482 interventional studies indexed under Fractures, Bone.

Browse Fractures, Bone studies →

Lead sponsor

Helsinki University Central Hospital is the lead sponsor of 299 studies on the registry; 60 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 70 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • a completely displaced middle third clavicle fracture, no cortical contact between main fragments
  • fresh fracture, treatment within seven days after injury
  • age between 18 and 70 years
  • provided informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • fracture was not dislocated
  • multiple injured patient
  • associated neurovascular injury, or suspicion of it
  • reduced cooperation
  • cancer or any severe illness impairing health
  • pathological fracture
  • treatment seven days after injury
  • open fracture
  • corticosteroid or immunosuppressive medication
  • upper extremity fracture at same time
  • an earlier clavicle or shoulder region fracture
  • pregnancy
  • lack of consent
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2 / Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Non-operative treatment

    Non-operative (conservative) treatment of the clavicle fracture

    Procedure: Non-operative treatment with arm immobilised to a sling

  • Active comparator
    Operative treatment

    Operative stabilization (i.e. ORIF) of the fracture with a plate and screws.

    Procedure: Operative treatment

Interventions

  • ProcedureOperative treatment

    Fracture stabilization with stainless steel reconstruction plate and screws. After the operation arm is immobilized to a sling for three weeks. Pendulum movements are allowed immediately.

  • ProcedureNon-operative treatment with arm immobilised to a sling

    Arm is immobilised to a sling for three weeks. Pendulum movements are allowed immediately.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Shoulder function

    Shoulder Function is measured by Constant shoulder Score (CS) is a outcome measure for assessing the outcomes of the treatment of shoulder disorders.It inclues the pain score, functional assessment, range of motion and strength measures.

    Time frame: Three months

  2. Shoulder function

    Shoulder Function is measured by Constant shoulder Score (CS) is a outcome measure for assessing the outcomes of the treatment of shoulder disorders.It inclues the pain score, functional assessment, range of motion and strength measures.

    Time frame: One year

  3. Shoulder function

    Shoulder Function is measured by Constant shoulder Score (CS) is a outcome measure for assessing the outcomes of the treatment of shoulder disorders.It inclues the pain score, functional assessment, range of motion and strength measures.

    Time frame: Two years

Secondary outcomes

  1. Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH)

    The DASH is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure physical function and symptoms in people with any of several musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb.

    Time frame: Three months

  2. Pain at rest and activity

    Pain in measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a psychometric response scale. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics that cannot be measured directly.

    Time frame: Three weeks

  3. Fracture healing

    Fracture healing is examined from Xray.

    Time frame: Three months

  4. Complications

    Number of participants who are confronted complications such as nonunion, malunion, infection, hardware breakdown or hardware irritation.

    Time frame: Continous till two years

  5. Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH)

    The DASH is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure physical function and symptoms in people with any of several musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb.

    Time frame: One year

  6. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH)

    The DASH is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure physical function and symptoms in people with any of several musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb.

    Time frame: Two years

  7. Pain at rest and activity

    Pain in measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a psychometric response scale. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics that cannot be measured directly.

    Time frame: Six weeks

  8. Pain at rest and at activity

    Pain in measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a psychometric response scale. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics that cannot be measured directly

    Time frame: Three months

  9. Pain at rest and at activity

    Pain in measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a psychometric response scale. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics that cannot be measured directly

    Time frame: One year

  10. Pain at rest and at activity

    Pain in measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a psychometric response scale. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics that cannot be measured directly

    Time frame: Two years

  11. Fracture healing

    Fracture healing is examined from Xray.

    Time frame: One year

  12. Fracture healing

    Fracture healing is examined from Xray.

    Time frame: Two years

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Helsinki University Central Hospital, Töölö Hospital
    Helsinki, Uusimaa 00260, Finland
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Jan;89(1):1-10. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00020. PubMed 17200303 ↗
  • Hill JM, McGuire MH, Crosby LA. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Jul;79(4):537-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.79b4.7529. PubMed 9250733 ↗
  • McKee MD, Seiler JG, Jupiter JB. The application of the limited contact dynamic compression plate in the upper extremity: an analysis of 114 consecutive cases. Injury. 1995 Dec;26(10):661-6. doi: 10.1016/0020-1383(95)00148-4. PubMed 8745801 ↗
  • NEER CS 2nd. Nonunion of the clavicle. J Am Med Assoc. 1960 Mar 5;172:1006-11. doi: 10.1001/jama.1960.03020100014003. No abstract available. PubMed 14426324 ↗
  • Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Mar;(300):127-32. PubMed 8131324 ↗
  • Nowak J, Holgersson M, Larsson S. Can we predict long-term sequelae after fractures of the clavicle based on initial findings? A prospective study with nine to ten years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004 Sep-Oct;13(5):479-86. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.01.026. PubMed 15383801 ↗
  • Nowak J, Mallmin H, Larsson S. The aetiology and epidemiology of clavicular fractures. A prospective study during a two-year period in Uppsala, Sweden. Injury. 2000 Jun;31(5):353-8. doi: 10.1016/s0020-1383(99)00312-5. PubMed 10775691 ↗
  • Poigenfurst J, Rappold G, Fischer W. Plating of fresh clavicular fractures: results of 122 operations. Injury. 1992;23(4):237-41. doi: 10.1016/s0020-1383(05)80006-3. PubMed 1618563 ↗
  • Zlowodzki M, Zelle BA, Cole PA, Jeray K, McKee MD; Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. Treatment of acute midshaft clavicle fractures: systematic review of 2144 fractures: on behalf of the Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. J Orthop Trauma. 2005 Aug;19(7):504-7. doi: 10.1097/01.bot.0000172287.44278.ef. PubMed 16056089 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 13, 2010, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01199653
Lead sponsor
Helsinki University Central Hospital
First posted
Sep 13, 2010
Start date
Aug 2004
Primary completion
Oct 2007
Completion
Nov 2009
Last update
Sep 13, 2010

Study contacts

Kaisa J Virtanen, MD
principal investigator · Helsinki Uiversity Central Hospital
Ville Remes, MD PhD
study chair · Helsinki University Central Hospital
Jarkko Pajarinen, MD PhD
study chair · Helsinki University Central Hospital
Vesa Savolainen, MD PhD
study chair · Helsinki University Central Hospital
Jan-Magnus Björkenheim, MD PhD
study chair · Helsinki University Central Hospital
Mika P Paavola, MD PhD
study director · Helsinki University Central Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2010. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion