There is no such thing as a "best method", the success of each method depends upon the exact nature of the fracture as well as the general health of the patient. Picking methods by the success rate alone is a touch short sighted, and there are other important factors. Although a surgical solution may have you overall back on your feet faster, there are risks of post operative complications and permanent implants in you, that may have subtler consequences.

Ultimately, there is only the best method for you, and this should be discussed with a professional.

Again, there are pro's and con's to each (and the best decisions are those made in consultation with you doctor).

However, in general ex-fixes are favoured because of their versatility and the fact they are less-invasive. They also allow ongoing modifications to the fracture itself (a useful ability in bone strecthing or reconstructive surgery), lead to less post-operative scarring, and they are cheaper. On the downside, they are often uncomfortable to wear, can cause distress to the patient (through infected pin sites and the visuals effect of wearing an ex-fix) and in certain procedures have lower success rates than implants.

People have been breaking bones for as long as there have been trees to climb, and fortunately in the early days tree's provided some of the best fracture treatments around. The simplest treatment for breaks is to splint it against something else, such as wood. Splinting is most useful in arms, legs and fingers where there is another similar appendage to attatch it to, this keeps the bones near to their natural position and provides support while the break heals. Where this were not possible branches and other solid objects were used.