Background There is no consensus on the optimal management of clavicle fractures, with advocates of both operative and non‐operative management. The objective of this study is to assess the trends in the management of clavicle fractures in Australia over the past two decades. Methods The incidence of surgical fixation of clavicle fractures from 2001 to 2020 was analysed using the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule database, reflective of operations performed on privately insured patients, thus excluding public patients and compensable cases. An offset term was utilized with data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics to account for population changes over the study period. Results A total of 17 089 procedures for the management of clavicle fractures were performed from 2001 to 2020. The incidence of operative intervention increased from 1.87 per 100 000 in 2001 to a peak of 6.63 per 100 000 in 2016. An overall increase was seen in males (310%) and females (347%) over the study period, as well as across all age groups. A greater proportion of operative interventions was performed on males (n = 14 075, 82%) than females (n = 3014, 18%, P < 0.001). The greatest increase in intervention was noted in those aged 65 or older (14% increase per year, 95% CI 11%–17%, P < 0.05). In 2020, the incidence of operative intervention decreased to a level last seen in 2013. Conclusions The incidence of operative interventions for clavicle fractures has increased in Australia over the 20‐year study period. This increase is in keeping with recent evidence suggesting several advantages when displaced mid‐shaft clavicle fractures are operatively managed.

Aims Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients’ outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients’ anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated study-level data in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We performed searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed from their dates of inception to January 2022. From included studies, we analyzed data for preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient-reported functional outcomes, and complication rates. Results A total of 13 studies (919 shoulders) were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients at initial evaluation was 72.2 years (42 to 87), with a mean follow-up time of 40.7 months (24 to 120). Nine studies with 292 rTSAs evaluated the use of bone graft and five studies with 627 rTSAs evaluated the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. One study was analyzed in both groups. Both techniques demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and ROM assessment, with augmented prostheses outperforming bone grafting on improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. There was a higher complication rate (8.9% vs 3.5%; p < 0.001) and revision rate among the bone grafting group compared with the patients who were treated with augmented prostheses (2.4% vs 0.6%; p = 0.022). Conclusion This review provides strong evidence that both bone graft and augmented glenoid baseplate techniques to address glenoid bone loss give excellent ROM and functional outcomes in primary rTSA. The use of augmented base plates may confer fewer complications and revisions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1334–1342.