Treatment of Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: Applicability of Appropriateness Criteria in Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate treatment choice for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) is challenging due to patient heterogeneity. Using the RAND/UCLA method, an international multidisciplinary expert panel established patient-specific criteria for the choice between non-surgical management (NSM), vertebroplasty (VP), and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP). OBJECTIVES: To assess the applicability of the appropriateness criteria in real-life practice. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Eight practices of experts who participated in the panel study, including 2 interventional radiologists, one internal medicine specialist, 2 neurosurgeons, and 3 orthopedic/trauma surgeons. Practices were located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. METHODS: Using an online data capture program, participants documented the clinical profile (age, gender, previous VCFs, time since fracture, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, evolution of symptoms, impact of symptoms on quality of life, spinal deformity, ongoing fracture process, and presence of pulmonary dysfunction) and treatment choice for consecutive patients who consulted them for OVCF. RESULTS: In total 426 patients were included. BKP was the most frequently chosen treatment option (49%), followed by VP (34%) and NSM (14%). When compared with the panel recommendations, inappropriate treatment choices were rare (5% for NSM, 2% for VP, none for BKP). Treatment choice was strongly associated with the clinical variables used in the panel study. Differences in treatment decisions between interventional radiologists and surgeons were largely determined by differences in patient characteristics, with time of clinical presentation being the dominant factor. LIMITATION: The study population was restricted to the practices of the participants of the panel study. CONCLUSION: This international, multi-specialty utilization review showed excellent applicability of, and good adherence with RAND/UCLA-based recommendations on treatment choice in OVCF.

Criteria for the appropriate treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneity of patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCF) necessitates a tailored approach of balancing the benefits and limitations of available treatments. Current guidelines are divergent, sometimes contradictory, and often insufficiently detailed to guide practice decisions. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed at establishing treatment recommendations at the patient-specific level. STUDY DESIGN: Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), the appropriateness of different treatment options for osteoporotic VCFs was assessed. SETTING: The assessment was conducted by a European multidisciplinary panel of 12 experts. METHODS: The appropriateness of non-surgical management (NSM), vertebroplasty (VP), and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) was determined for 128 hypothetical patient profiles. These were unique combinations of clinical factors considered relevant to treatment choice (time since fracture, MRI findings, impact and evolution of symptoms, spinal deformity, ongoing fracture process, and pulmonary dysfunction). After 2 individual rating rounds and plenary meetings, appropriateness statements (appropriate, inappropriate, and uncertain) were calculated for all clinical scenarios. RESULTS: Disagreement dropped from 31% in the first round to 7% in the second round. Appropriateness outcomes showed specific patterns for the 3 treatments. For three-quarters of the profiles, only one treatment was considered appropriate: NSM 25%, VP 6%, and BKP 45%. NSM was usually appropriate in patients with a negative MRI or a positive MRI without other unfavorable conditions (poor outcomes for the other variables). VP was usually appropriate in patients with a positive MRI, time since fracture ≥ 6 weeks, and no spinal deformity. BKP was recommended for all patients with an ongoing fracture process, and also in most patients with a positive MRI and ≥ 1 other unfavorable factor. LIMITATIONS: The prevalence of the patient profiles in daily practice is yet unknown. CONCLUSION: The panel results may help to support treatment choice in the heterogeneous population of patients with osteoporotic VCF.