This report presents three implementations for solving 3D puzzles of fractured bones: two semi-automatic ones and one which is automatic. These are compared using qualitative as well as quantitative tests to find out if less interaction can yield equal or better results. Qualitative tests are performed on real clinical data from CT-scans. A model created in Blender is used for quantitative tests. Test results have shown that each implementation has its own strengths and weaknesses which can make them usable for different types of fractures. It may be possible to combine automatic solutions and manual ones to increase the number of solvable cases. The conclusion is that it is possible to reduce fractures with less user interaction and still get equal or better results, but it depends on the fracture case as well as the user.