The Clinical Impact of Fracture Liaison Services: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: A fracture liaison service (FLS) is a coordinated system of care that streamlines osteoporosis management in the orthopaedic setting and can serve as an effective form of secondary preventative care in these patients. The present work reviews the available evidence regarding the impact of fracture liaison services on clinical outcomes. METHODS: The literature was reviewed for studies reporting changes in the rates of bone mineral density scanning (DXA), antiresorptive therapy, new minimum trauma fractures, and mortality between cohorts with access to an FLS or not. Studies including intention to treat level data were retained. A Medline search for "fracture liaison" OR "secondary fracture prevention" produced 146 results, 98 were excluded based on the abstract, 38 were excluded based on full-text review. Ten level III studies encompassing 48,045 patients were included, of which 5 studies encompassing 7,086 were analyzed. Odds-ratios for DXA and anti-osteoporosis pharmacotherapy rates were calculated from data. Fixed and random effects analyses were performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: Four studies reported, on average, a 6-fold improvement in DXA scanning rates (Figure 1). Six studies reported, on average, a 3-fold improvement in antiresorptive therapy rates (Figure 2). Four large studies reported significant reductions in the rate of new fractures using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models at 12 months (HR = 0.84, 0.95), 24 months (HR = 0.44, 0.65), and 36 months (HR = 0.67). Five large studies reported mortality improvements using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models at 12 months (HR = 0.88, 0.84, 0.81) and 24 months (HR = 0.65, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that fracture liaison services improve rates of DXA scanning and antiresorptive therapy as well as reductions in the rates of new fractures and mortality among patients seen following minimum trauma fractures across many time points.

Timing of Bisphosphonate Initiation After Fracture: What Does the Data Really Say?

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is often not clinically recognized until after a fracture occurs. Individuals who have 1 fracture are at increased risk of future fractures. Prompt initiation of osteoporosis treatment following fracture is critical to reducing the rate of future fractures. Antiresorptives are the most widely used class of medications for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Many providers are hesitant to initiate antiresorptives in the acute post-fracture period. Concerns include interference with bone remodeling necessary for successful fracture healing, which would cause increased rates of non-union, malunion, and refracture. While such concerns should not extend to anabolic medications, physicians may also hesitate to initiate anabolic osteoporosis therapies due to high cost and/or lack of familiarity. This article aims to briefly review the available data and present a digestible narrative summary to familiarize practicing orthopaedic surgeons with the essential details of the published research on this topic. RESULTS: The results of 20 clinical studies and key pre-clinical studies related to the effect of anti-resorptive medications for osteoporosis on fracture healing are summarized in the body of this narrative review. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS: While few level I studies have examined the impact of timing of initiation of osteoporosis medications in the acute post-fracture period, the few that have been published do not support these concerns. Specifically, data from level I clinical trials indicate that initiating bisphosphonates as early as 2 weeks post-fracture does not increase rates of non-union or malunion. By reviewing the available data, we hope to give clinicians the confidence to initiate osteoporosis treatment promptly post-fracture.