Abstract/Text: It has been believed since the time of Hippocrates that clavicle fractures require little more than benign neglect by clinicians. Although many patients who have clavicle injuries do achieve adequate healing and functional recovery without surgical interventions, good outcomes, especially with displaced fractures, are not universal. Recent literature suggests that a subset of midclavicular injuries may warrant primary surgical treatment to minimize the incidence of nonunion and/or symptomatic malunion. Furthermore, certain types of clavicular injuries result in suboptimal outcomes when managed nonoperatively. This article is based on the currently available clinical evidence on the evolving management of acute clavicle fractures.

Abstract/Text: It has been believed since the time of Hippocrates that clavicle fractures require little more than benign neglect by clinicians. Although many patients who have clavicle injuries do achieve adequate healing and functional recovery without surgical interventions, good outcomes, especially with displaced fractures, are not universal. Recent literature suggests that a subset of midclavicular injuries may warrant primary surgical treatment to minimize the incidence of nonunion and/or symptomatic malunion. Furthermore, certain types of clavicular injuries result in suboptimal outcomes when managed nonoperatively. This article is based on the currently available clinical evidence on the evolving management of acute clavicle fractures.