Comparative Study on the EfÏcacy of Traditional Mongolian Medicine Bone Setting and Surgical Treatment for Humeral Surgical Neck Fractures

Abstract

Background: The surgical neck of the humerus is located approximately 2–3 cm distal to the anatomical neck (collum anatomicum) at the junction of the greater and lesser tubercles and the humeral shaft. Owing to the transition between cortical and cancellous bones, this region is biomechanically vulnerable and prone to fractures, particularly in older adults. Fractures of the surgical neck of the humerus are classified under the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10), with diagnostic codes S42.21.3, S42.22, and S42.23. National statistics indicate that 210,763 new trauma cases were reported in Mongolia in 2023, representing an 11.6% increase compared to the previous year, of which 11,452 cases (5.4%) involved shoulder and humeral injuries. Aim: This study aimed to compare the clinical effects of traditional Mongolian bone-setting therapy and surgical treatment on pain intensity, shoulder function, range of motion, and activities of daily living in patients with surgical neck of the humerus fractures. Materials and Methods: Based on the Department of Traditional Therapies of the Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences (MNUMS) and the Department of Orthopedic Trauma of the Inner Mongolia International Hospital, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China, a total of 60 patients diagnosed with surgical neck fractures of the humerus were enrolled in this study between January 2024 and December 2025. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups: a Mongolian traditional bone-setting therapy group (n=30) and a surgical treatment group (n=30). Assessments were conducted before treatment and at 1 month and 3 months after treatment. Shoulder joint range of motion, activities of daily living, and muscle strength were evaluated using the Constant–Murley score, while pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The collected data were systematically analyzed, and the therapeutic outcomes of the two treatment modalities were comprehensively compared and summarized. Results: The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups. In the traditional bone-setting group, VAS scores decreased significantly, whereas Constant–Murley scores improved markedly at both follow-up points. The overall outcomes in the traditional bone-setting group were significantly better than those in the surgical group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Traditional Mongolian bone-setting therapy offers rapid pain relief, superior long-term functional recovery, and fewer complications, making it a valuable treatment option, particularly for elderly patients and those unsuitable for surgery.