A novel fracture liaison service using digital health: impact on mortality in hospitalized elderly osteoporotic fracture patients.

We examined the performance of an intelligent fracture liaison service (FLS) assisted by digital health (DH) to reduce all-cause mortality (ACM) risk. According to our findings, the new FLS reduced ACM by 36%. INTRODUCTION: A well-designed secondary prevention program known as FLS enhances the bone densitometry-based assessment rate as well as osteoporosis (OP) medication usage following a fracture. However, there are only a few reports on FLS incorporating DH, and it remains unclear whether this integration has influenced patient ACM, which refers to the overall death rate from any cause during the study period. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted on data from the Fragility Fracture Registration System database linked to the Regional Health Registration Platform of Kunshan City and the Population Death Registration System of Jiangsu Province for one tertiary-level A hospital in China. Patients aged ≥ 50 years, who experienced an OP fracture between January 1, 2017, and July 27, 2022, requiring hospitalization, were selected for analysis. We compared the outcomes of patients who received routine fragility fracture management (the no-FLS group) or FLS (the FLS group). We employed multivariable Cox regression with inverse probability weighting based on the propensity score (PS). RESULTS: Of 2317 patients, 756 (32.6%) received FLS and 1561 (67.4%) did not. Using PS matching, we minimized the baseline characteristic differences between the two groups in the propensity score-matched samples, relative to the unmatched samples. Based on our analysis, the new FLS reduced ACM by 36% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.87; P-value = 0.004). Moreover, FLS patients experienced further reductions in fall-related mortality, refracture rate, and total refracture-related hospital costs, and had increased dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) testing and treatment initiation rates, relative to the no-FLS patients. CONCLUSIONS: A new FLS model implementation assisted by DH can effectively reduce ACM among elderly patients with OP fractures requiring surgery. In future investigations, we recommend examining the scalability of this model.

Effectiveness of fracture liaison service in reducing the risk of secondary fragility fractures in adults aged 50 and older: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To determine and appraise the certainty of fracture liaison service (FLS) in reducing the risk of secondary fragility fractures in older adults aged ≥ 50 years and to examine the nature of the FLS and the roles of various disciplines involved in the delivery of the FLS. Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and The Cochrane Library were searched from January 1st, 2010, to May 31st, 2022. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the PEDro scale for randomized trials, while the GRADE approach established the certainty of the evidence. Thirty-seven studies were identified of which 34 (91.9%) were rated as having a low risk of bias and 22 (59.5%) were meta-analyzed. Clinically important low certainty evidence at 1 year (RR 0.26, CI 0.13 to 0.52, 6 pooled studies) and moderate certainty evidence at ≥ 2 years (RR 0.68, CI 0.55 to 0.83, 13 pooled studies) indicate that the risk of secondary fragility fracture was lower in the FLS intervention compared to the non-FLS intervention. Sensitivity analyses with no observed heterogeneity confirmed these findings. This review found clinically important moderate certainty evidence showing that the risk of secondary fragility fracture was lower in the FLS intervention at ≥ 2 years. More high-quality studies in this field could improve the certainty of the evidence. Review registration: PROSPERO-CRD42021266408.

Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping review.

This research conducts a comparative analysis and scoping review of 105 studies in the field of Fracture Liaison Service (FLS). The resulting two-dimensional framework represents a significant step toward FLS implementation. PURPOSE: The primary goal is to review interventions in real world settings in order to provide the FLS framework that specifies the essential elements of its implementation and offers different perspectives on that. METHOD: This study encompasses two phases: a comparative analysis of existing FLS models, including "Capture the Fracture," "5IQ," and "Ganda," and a scoping review from 2012 to 2022 in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, and IEEE databases limited to publications in English. RESULTS: The resulting model of comparative analysis identifies patient identification, investigation, intervention and integration or continuity of care as the four main stages of FLS. Additionally, the elements of quality and information span across all stages. Following comparative analysis, the framework is designed to be used for content analysis of the included studies in the scoping review. The intersection of columns (Who, Where, When, What, How, Quality) with rows (Identification, Investigation, Intervention, and continuity of care) yields a set of questions, answered in tabular form based on the scoping review. CONCLUSION: The framework offers potential benefits in facilitating the adoption of effective approaches for FLS implementation. It is recommended to undertake an in-depth review of each of these components in order to uncover novel and innovative approaches for improving their implementation.

Should major trauma fractures be part of a fracture liaison service's remit: a cost-benefit estimate.

The refracture rate after major trauma is approximately half (57%) the refracture rate after a minimal trauma injury. Extending Fracture Liaison Service activity to include major trauma patients creates significant additional direct cost, but remains essentially cost neutral if notional savings through refracture risk reduction are taken into account. PURPOSE: To compare the 3-year refracture rate following minimal trauma (MT) and non-minimal trauma (non-MT) injuries and evaluate the cost of extending fracture liaison service (FLS) operations to non-MT presentations. METHODS: Patients aged 50, or above presenting to the John Hunter Hospital with a fracture in calendar year 2018 were identified through the Integrated Patient Management System (IPMS) of the Hunter New England Health Service's (HNEHS), and re-presentation to any HNEHS facility over the following 3 years monitored. The refracture rate of MT and non-MT presentations was compared and analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. The cost of including non-MT patients was estimated through the use of a previously conducted micro-costing analysis. The operational fidelity of the FLS to the previous estimate was confirmed by comparing the 3-year refracture rate of MT presentations in the two studies. RESULTS: The 3-year refracture rate following a MT injury was 8% and after non-MT injury 4.5%. Extension of FLS activities to include non-MT patients in 2022 would have cost an additional $198,326 AUD with a notional loss/saving of $ - 26,625/ + 26,913 AUD through refracture risk reduction. No clinically available characteristic at presentation predictive of increased refracture risk was identified. CONCLUSION: The 3-year refracture after a non-MT injury is about half (57%) that of the refracture rate after a MT injury. Extending FLS activity to non-MT patients incurs a significant additional direct cost but remains cost neutral if notional savings gained through reduction in refracture risk are taken into account.

Fracture liaison service-a multidisciplinary approach to osteoporosis management.

A fracture liaison service is a systems-level multidisciplinary approach designed to reduce subsequent fracture risk in patients who recently sustained fragility fractures. It is estimated that one in three women and one in five men over the age of 50 years old have osteoporosis. Nonetheless, only 9 to 20% of patients who sustain an initial fragility fracture eventually receive any osteoporosis treatment. With the aim of preventing subsequent fractures, a fracture liaison service (FLS) works through identifying patients presenting with fragility fractures to the hospital and providing them with easier access to osteoporosis care through referrals for bone health and fracture risk assessment and recommendation or initiation of osteoporosis treatment. Currently, there are four major types of FLS models ranging from services that only identify at-risk patients and inform and educate the patient but take no further part in communicating their findings to other stakeholders in patients' care, to services that identify, investigate, and initiate treatment at the other end of the spectrum. In this article, we review the benefits, challenges, and outcomes of FLS in the American healthcare system with further exploration of the roles each member of the multidisciplinary team can play in improving patients' bone health.

Establishing consensus recommendations for long-term osteoporosis care for patients who have attended an Australian fracture liaison service: a Delphi study.

Coordinating healthcare activities between fracture liaison services (FLS) and primary care is challenging. Using a Delphi technique, we developed 34 consensus statements to support improved care coordination across this healthcare transition. PURPOSE: Evidence supporting an optimal coordination strategy between fracture liaison services (FLS) and primary care is lacking. This study aimed to develop consensus statements to support consistency and benchmarking of clinical practice to improve coordination of care for patients transitioning from FLS to primary care following an osteoporotic fracture. METHODS: A Delphi technique was used to develop consensus among a panel of experts, including FLS clinicians (medical and non-medical), general practitioners (GPs), and consumers. RESULTS: Results of a preparatory questionnaire (n = 33) informed the development of 34 statements for review by expert panellists over two Delphi rounds (n = 25 and n = 19, respectively). The majority of participants were from New South Wales (82%), employed as FLS clinicians (78.8%) and working in metropolitan centres (60.6%). Consensus was achieved for 24/34 statements in round one and 8/10 statements in round two. All statements concerning patient education, communication, and the GP-patient relationship achieved consensus. Expert opinions diverged in some areas of clinician roles and responsibilities and long-term monitoring and management recommendations. CONCLUSION: We found clear consensus among experts in many key areas of FLS integration with primary care. While experts agreed that primary care is the most appropriate setting for long-term osteoporosis care, overall confidence in primary care systems to achieve this was low. The role of (and responsibility for) adherence monitoring in a resource-limited setting remains to be defined.

Secondary fracture prevention in primary care: a narrative review.

The global burden of osteoporosis continues to rise with an ageing population. Untreated osteoporotic fractures not only heighten the risk of subsequent fractures but are associated with excess mortality. Although primary care guidelines consistently stress the importance of secondary fracture prevention, fewer than 20% of patients are appropriately treated for osteoporosis following an initial osteoporotic fracture. This worldwide phenomenon is known as the osteoporosis care gap. This literature review examines the barriers to secondary fracture prevention in primary care and evaluates the effectiveness of targeted primary care interventions. Common themes emerged from the majority of qualitative studies, including a need for improved communication between the hospital team and primary care, better defined responsibilities and osteoporosis-directed education for the primary care physicians. Quantitative studies demonstrated that most targeted, intensive interventions aimed at educating patients and their primary care physician about osteoporosis treatment significantly increased rates of investigation and treatment. Greater uptake of models of secondary fracture prevention in primary care is urgently needed to address the osteoporosis care gap.

Physical performance and sarcopenia assessment in patients with a recent fracture visiting the Fracture Liaison Service.

Impaired physical performance is associated with increased fracture risk. Performance on four physical functioning tests and prevalence of sarcopenia were assessed for 1789 fracture patients and compared to reference data. Performance was low on all tests, especially for patients with a hip, major or ≥ 1 prevalent vertebral fracture. PURPOSE INTRODUCTION: Impaired physical performance and sarcopenia are associated with increased fracture risk. This study aims to assess physical performance and the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with a recent clinical fracture attending the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) compared to population means. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, chair stand test (CST), handgrip strength (HGS), timed-up-and-go (TUG), 6-min walking-test (6MWT), and sarcopenia (following EWGSOP2) were assessed. The proportion of patients with impaired/poor performance compared to reference data was calculated (Z-score: ≥ - 2SD to < - 1 (impaired) and < - 2 SD (poor)). Associations of fracture type, sex, age, and time since fracture with Z-scores were assessed using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1789 consecutive FLS patients were included (median age (IQR): 66 (59-74), 70.7% females, 3.9 (± 1.6) months after fracture). The prevalence of impaired/poor performance for CST, HGS, TUG, and 6MWT was 39.2%, 30.4%, 21.9%, and 71.5%, respectively (expected proportion of 16%) and 2.8% had sarcopenia. Lower Z-scores (P < 0.001) were found for hip, major, and ≥ 1 prevalent vertebral fracture (VF) in CST (major: regression coefficient (B) (95%CI) = - 0.25 [- 0.34, - 0.16]; hip: B = - 0.32 [- 0.47, - 0.17], VF: B = - 0.22 [- 0.34, - 0.11]), TUG; (major: B = - 0.54 [- 0.75, - 0.33]; hip: B = - 1.72 [- 2.08, -1.35], VF: B = - 0.61 [- 0.88, - 0.57]), 6MWT (major: B = - 0.34 [- 0.47, - 0.21]; hip: B = - 0.99 [- 1,22, - 0.77], VF: B = - 0.36 [- 0.53, - 0.19]). CONCLUSIONS: Physical performance is significantly lower in FLS patients compared to healthy peers, especially in patients with hip, major or prevalent VF. These findings underline the need to assess and improve the physical performance of FLS patients, despite a low prevalence of sarcopenia.

Lessons Learned: Evaluation of Fracture Liaison Service Quality Improvement Efforts in a Large Academic Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) care model, a care coordination program for patients experiencing a fragility fracture, is proven to improve management of patients with an osteoporotic fracture, but treatment initiation gaps persist. OBJECTIVE: We describe the evolution of a centralized FLS within a university-based healthcare system, including impact of adding clinical pharmacist consultation, and describe circumstances surrounding continued care gaps. DESIGN: Cohort analysis of osteoporosis medication initiation before FLS, after initial implementation, and after addition of pharmacist consultation. PATIENTS: Individuals aged 65 and older experiencing any fragility fracture between 7/1/16 and 3/31/22. INTERVENTION: A centralized team outreached eligible patients, ordered dual x-ray absorptiometry and laboratory tests as needed, and scheduled an osteoporosis-focused primary care appointment. Three years after FLS implementation, clinical pharmacist consultative review was added prior to the primary care visit. MAIN MEASURES: Initiation of osteoporosis pharmacologic therapy, completion of DXA, primary care follow-up rate, and description of circumstances where therapy was not initiated. KEY RESULTS: Of 1204 new fractures between 7/1/16 and 3/31/22, 315 patients were enrolled in one of two FLS phases, and 89 eligible historical controls were identified. Medication initiation rates went from 22/89 (25%) pre-FLS to 201/428 (47%) after-FLS phase 1 [POST1] (p<0.001) and to 106/187 (57%) after FLS phase 2 (POST2), when clinical pharmacist consultation was added (p=0.03 versus POST1). DXA was completed in 56/89 (67%) of pre-FLS patients, 364/428 (85%) POST1 patients (p<0.001 versus pre), and 163/187 (87%) POST2 (p< 0.001 versus PRE, p=0.59 versus POST1). Of 375 patients who did not initiate osteoporosis medication, more in the combined post-FLS cohorts attended a follow-up primary care appointment (233/308, 76% attended, versus pre-FLS 41/67, 61%, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: An FLS including centralized outreach and care coordination significantly improved patient follow-up, DXA, and medication initiation. Addition of de-centralized pharmacist consultation further improved medication initiation rates.

Taking care of inpatients with fragility hip fractures: the hip-padua osteosarcopenia (Hip-POS) fracture liaison service model.

PURPOSE: Osteoporotic fragility fractures (FF), particularly those affecting the hip, represent a major clinical and socio-economic concern. These fractures can lead to various adverse outcomes, which may be exacerbated by the presence of sarcopenia, especially among older and frail patients. Early identification of patients with FF is crucial for implementing effective diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to prevent subsequent fractures and their associated consequences. METHODS: The Hip-POS program, implemented at Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, is a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) program to evaluate patients aged > 50 years old admitted with fragility hip fractures, involving an interdisciplinary team. After the identification of patients with hip fractures in the Emergency Department, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to identify risk factors for further fractures, and to assess the main domains of multidimensional geriatric assessment, including muscle status. Patients are then prescribed with anti-fracture therapy, finally undergoing periodic follow-up visits. RESULTS: During the first five months, a total of 250 patients were evaluated (70.4% women, median age 85 years). Following assessment by the Hip-POS team, compared to pre-hospitalization, the proportion of patients not receiving antifracture therapy decreased significantly from 60 to 21%. The prescription rates of vitamin D and calcium increased markedly from 29.6% to 81%. CONCLUSIONS: We introduced the Hip-POS program for the care of older adults with hip fractures. We aspire that our model will represent a promising approach to enhancing post-fracture care by addressing the multifactorial nature of osteoporosis and its consequences, bridging the gap in secondary fracture prevention, and improving patient outcomes.

Secondary osteoporosis prevention: three-year outcomes from a Fracture Liaison Service in elderly hip fracture patients.

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are the most serious fragility fractures due to their associated disability, higher hospitalization costs and high mortality rates. Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) programs have enhanced the management of osteoporosis-related fractures and have shown their clinical effectiveness. AIMS: To analyze the effect of the implementation of a FLS model of care over the survival and mortality rates following a hip fracture. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study on patients over 60 years of age who suffered a hip fracture before and after the implementation of the FLS in our center (between January 2016 and December 2019). Patients were followed for three years after the index date. Mortality, complications and refracture rates were compared between the two groups using a Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: A total of 1366 patients were included in this study (353 before FLS implementation and 1013 after FLS implementation). Anti-osteoporotic drugs were more frequently prescribed after FLS implementation (79.3% vs 12.5%; p < 0.01) and there was an increase in adherence to treatment (51.7% vs 30.2%; p < 0.01). A total of 413 (40.8%) patients after FLS implementation and 141 (39.9%) individuals before (p = 0.47) died during the three-years follow-up period. A second fracture occurred in 101 (10.0%) patients after FLS implementation and 37 (10.5%) individuals before (p = 0.78). Patients after the implementation of the FLS protocol had a lower all cause one-year mortality [adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.74 (0.57-0.94)] and a decreased risk of suffering a second osteoporotic fracture [adjusted HR 0.54 (0.39-0.75) in males and adjusted HR 0.46 (0.30-0.71) in females]. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a FLS protocol was associated with a lower all-cause one-year mortality rate and a higher survivorship in elderly hip fracture patients. However, no three-year mortality rate differences were observed between the two groups. We also found a reduction in the complication and second-fracture rates.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a multinational FLS mentorship programme in Latin America.

Realising the benefits of systematic secondary fracture prevention requires supporting local sites to get started and becoming effective. We here describe the development, implementation and impact of a regional fracture liaison service (FLS) mentorship programme in Latin America that led to 64 FLS getting started and coverage of 17,205 patients. INTRODUCTION: Despite treatments and service models to deliver effective secondary fracture prevention, most patients are left untreated after a fragility fracture. To improve the capability to get FLS started and more effective, we describe the development, implementation and evaluation of an international programme to develop national communities of FLS mentors as part of the Capture the Fracture Partnership in Latin America. METHODS: The IOF regional team and the University of Oxford developed the curriculum and associated resources for training mentors in setting up FLS, service improvement and mentorship. Mentors were selected during a preparatory meeting, trained using live online sessions followed by regular mentor-led post-training meetings. The programme was evaluated using a pre-training needs assessment and post-training evaluation based on Moore's outcomes. RESULTS: The mentorship programme was initiated in Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Argentina. The mentors were multidisciplinary, including orthopaedic surgery, rehabilitation, rheumatology, endocrinology, geriatrics, gynaecology and internal medicine. There was 100% participation in training sessions and reported satisfaction with the training. Since the initiation of the training programme, 22 FLS have been set up in Mexico, 30 in Brazil, 3 in Colombia and 9 in Argentina, in comparison with two in Chile and none in any other LATAM countries that were not involved in the mentorship programme. This equates to approximately 17,025 additional patients identified from 2019 to 2021 after initiation of mentorship. The mentors have engaged with 58 FLS for service development. Post-training activities include two published national best practice guidelines and other country-specific resources for FLS in the local language. CONCLUSION: Despite the COVID pandemic, the mentorship pillar of the Capture the Fracture Partnership has developed a community of FLS mentors with measurable improvement in national FLS provision. The programme is a potentially scalable platform to develop communities of mentors in other countries.

Clinical and biological parameters associated with fracture recurrence according to fracture liaison service dataset.

This study describes the characteristics of 337 patients seen by the fracture liaison service of the Amiens University Hospital for at least two osteoporotic fractures between 2009 and 2019. Results showed that recurrent fracture occurs rapidly after the index fracture. Rheumatological and therapeutic managements are not sufficient, mainly because of cognitive disorders or patients' refusal. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients taken in charge by a fracture liaison service and sustaining a recurrent osteoporotic fracture. METHODS: This was a retrospective and monocentric study based on the dataset of patients included in the FLS of the Department of Rheumatology of the Amiens University Hospital. To be included in the study cohort, patients must have had at least two consecutive osteoporotic fractures between January 2009 and December 2019. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-seven patients were included. The mean age at index fracture was 77.3 ± 12.5 years. Eighty-four percent of the patients were women. 89.3% of the patients had a Charlson comorbidity index between 1 and 4. Nearly half of the patients had cognitive disorders. Femoral neck was the most frequent site for both index and recurrent fractures. Thirty-seven percent of patients benefited from a consultation in Rheumatology after their index fracture. The main reasons for the lack of follow-up were cognitive disorders and patient rejection. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that recurrent fracture occurs rapidly after the index fracture and that rheumatological and therapeutic managements are not sufficient, mainly because of cognitive disorders or patients' refusal impairing the patients to benefit from specialized management.

An Orthopaedic Surgeon Led Osteoporosis (OSLO) Model of Care reduces early recurrent fracture rates and improves treatment compliance in patients treated for osteoporotic fractures.

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of an Orthopaedic Surgeon Led Osteoporosis Model of Care (OSLO-MoC) in improving care of patients with primary osteoporotic fractures. The OSLO-MOC has shown to be effective in improving osteoporotic medication initiation and compliance and reducing secondary fracture rates in patients. PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of an Orthopaedic Surgeon Led Osteoporosis Model of Care (OSLO-MoC) as compared to a Case Manager Led Osteoporosis Model of Care (CMLO-MoC) in reducing early osteoporotic re-fracture rates and treatment compliance in patients. METHODS: This was a single centre, retrospective, comparative cohort study of all patients screened and treated for secondary osteoporotic fracture prevention from the 2008 to 2018 at an orthopaedic surgical unit. From the 2008 to 2013, patients were recruited under the CMLO-MoC and from 2014 to 2018, under the OSLO-MOC. Logistics regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors such as OSLO-MOC implementation, gender, ethnicity, marital status and education level for patient recruitment, treatment compliance and secondary fracture rates at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Over a 10-year period, 7388 patients were screened of which 2855 patients were eligible for analysis. A total of 1234 patients were recruited under CMLO-MoC and 1621 patients under OSLO-MOC. Implementation of the OSLO-MOC was associated with greater patient recruitment, OR 1.26 (95%CI 1.06-1.49, P = 0.007). Of the 2855 patients recruited, OSLO-MOC implementation, OR 2.61 (95%CI 2.03-3.36, P < 0.001), and a higher level of education, OR 1.428 (95%CI 1.02-1.43, P = 0.037), were associated with improved compliance to medication at 12 months. OSLO-MOC implementation was the only factor associated with reduced risk of secondary fractures at 12 months, OR 0.14 (95%CI 0.03-0.66, P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: The OSLO-MOC has shown to be effective in reducing the rate of re-fracture and osteoporotic medication initiation and compliance of patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Fracture liaison service model: project design and accreditation.

Frailty fractures place a significant socioeconomic burden on the health care system. The Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (SIOT) is proceeding to fracture liaison service (FLS) model accreditation in several Italian Fracture Units (FUs), which provides a multidisciplinary approach for the management of the fragility fracture patient. INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis and the resulting fragility fractures, particularly femoral fractures, place significant socioeconomic burdens on the health care system globally. In addition, there is a general lack of awareness of osteoporosis, resulting in underestimation of the associated risks and suboptimal treatment of the disease. The fracture liaison service (FLS) represents an exemplary model of post-fracture care that involves a multidisciplinary approach to the frail patient through the collaboration of multiple specialists. The purpose of this article is to highlight the path undertaken by the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (SIOT) for the purpose of certification of numerous FLS centers throughout Italy. METHODS: SIOT is proceeding with international FLS accreditation in several Italian Fracture Units (FUs), following the creation of a model that provides specific operational and procedural steps for the management of fragility fractures throughout the country. FUs that decide to join the project and implement this model within their facility are then audited by an ACCREDIA-accredited medical certification body. RESULTS: The drafted FLS model, thanks to the active involvement of a panel of experts appointed by SIOT, outlines a reference operational model that describes a fluid and articulated process that identifies the procedure of identification, description of diagnostic framing, and subsequent initiation of appropriate secondary prevention programs for fractures of individuals who have presented with a recent fragility fracture of the femur. CONCLUSION: Accreditation of this prevention model will enable many facilities to take advantage of this dedicated diagnostic-therapeutic pathway for the purpose of fracture prevention and reduction of associated health and social costs.

Exploring barriers and opportunities to improve osteoporosis care across the acute-to-primary care interface: a qualitative study.

This qualitative study interviewed general practitioners, patients, and FLS clinicians and identified key challenges facing stakeholders seeking to improve post-fracture osteoporosis care. Local policies and care pathways as an initial strategy may address information and service delivery issues across the acute-primary care divide. INTRODUCTION: Fracture liaison services (FLS) can be effective for secondary fracture prevention, but long-term adherence to therapies remains suboptimal. Few studies have explored how services manage the transition between tertiary and primary post-fracture care. This study mapped service processes and factors influencing integration of post-clinic care, identifying barriers, supports, and opportunities for seamless healthcare. METHODS: Qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews with FLS stakeholders at two metropolitan hospitals in New South Wales (NSW) and surrounding general practices. RESULTS: Seven FLS clinicians, 11 general practitioners (GPs), and seven patients were interviewed. Six key themes emerged on the transition of patient care from tertiary to primary care (PC). Interprofessional communication issues and role ambiguity posed threats to seamless care. Delayed, absent, inaccessible, or poor-quality communication frustrated GPs, while FLS clinicians lacked confidence in existing communication systems and desired bidirectional communication with PC. GPs were confident managing osteoporosis, but FLS clinicians had limited confidence that patients would discuss osteoporosis with their GP and that GPs would action recommendations. Effective PC follow-up required a positive GP-patient relationship and that patients perceived a need to engage with PC. Patient understanding of osteoporosis (influenced by patient education, knowledge, beliefs, and health behaviours) affected PC attendance. Limited public awareness of osteoporosis and healthcare policy deficits contributed to care gaps. CONCLUSION: Key challenges were identified facing stakeholders seeking to improving post-clinic osteoporosis care. Development and implementation of local, integrated acute-community policies and care pathways as an initial intervention may address information and service delivery issues across the acute-PC divide.

Physical Functioning in Patients with a Recent Fracture: The "Can Do, Do Do" Framework Applied to Explore Physical Capacity, Physical Activity and Fall Risk Factors.

Physical capacity (PC) and physical activity (PA) are associated physical performance measures, and combined, PC and PA are used to categorize physical performance in the "can do, do do" framework. We aimed to explore physical performance of patients attending the fracture liaison service (FLS). In this cross-sectional study, PC was measured by 6-min-walking-test (can't do/can do) and PA by accelerometer (don't do/do do). Following quadrants were defined based on predefined cut-off scores for poor performance: (1) "can't do, don't do"; (2) "can do, don't do"; (3) "can't do, do do"; (4) "can do, do do". Odds ratios (OR) were calculated and fall and fracture risk factors were assessed between quadrants. Physical performance of 400 fracture patients was assessed (mean age 64; female 70.8%). Patients performed as follows: 8.3% "can't do, don't do"; 3.0% "can do, don't do"; 19.3% "can't do, do do"; 69.5% "can do, do do". For the "can't do" group the OR for low PA was 9.76 (95% CI: 4.82-19.80). Both the "can't do, don't do" and "can't do, do do" group differed significantly compared to the "can do, do do" group on several fall and fracture risk factors and had lower physical performance. The "can do, do do" framework is able to identify fracture patients with an impaired physical performance. Of all FLS patients 20% "can't do, but "do do" while having a high prevalence of fall risk factors compared to persons that "can do, do do", which may indicate this group is prone to fall.

Secondary fracture rates and risk factors 1 year after a proximal femoral fracture under FLS.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the secondary fracture rates and risk factors in patients with proximal femoral fractures using fracture liaison service (FLS) during the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multi-center prospective cohort study, patients with proximal femoral fractures who were treated surgically at three hospitals from April 2020 to March 2021 were included. Follow-up examinations at 6 and 12 months postoperatively were conducted to investigate the clinical data and ascertain whether osteoporosis treatment could be continued. RESULTS: A total of 316 patients with proximal femoral fractures were registered. During the follow-up period, 17 patients died and 67 patients could not visit the hospitals owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, 172 patients who could be followed-up 12 months postoperatively were examined using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry during hospitalization; underwent postoperative osteoporosis treatment, mainly with bisphosphonates (89.5%); and were administered medications continuously. Secondary fractures occurred within 1 year in 14 patients (8.1%). Multivariate analysis showed that patients who used sleeping pills and had a lower functional independence measure had an increased risk for developing secondary fractures. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, secondary fractures can be prevented if the patients can be followed and osteoporosis treatment can be continued. Conversely, despite adequate osteoporosis drug examination and treatment, a certain number of secondary fractures still occurred. The finding that postoperative osteoporosis therapy using routine medications and rehabilitation is associated with secondary fractures may support the importance of establishing clinical standards consisting of a multidisciplinary collaboration for FLS.

The Korean hip fracture registry study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the Korean Hip Fracture Registry (KHFR) Study is to establish a nationwide, hospital-based prospective cohort study of adults with hip fracture to explore the incidence and risk factors of second osteoporotic fractures for a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) model. METHODS: The KHFR, a prospective multicenter longitudinal study, was launched in 2014. Sixteen centers recruited participants who were treated for hip fracture. The inclusion criteria were patients, who were treated for proximal femur fracture due to low-energy trauma and aged 50 or more at the time of injury. Until 2018, 5,841 patients were enrolled in this study. Follow-up surveys were conducted annually to determine occurrence of second osteoporotic fracture, and 4,803 participants completed at least one follow-up survey. DISCUSSION: KHFR is a unique resource of individual level on osteoporotic hip fracture with radiological, medical, and laboratory information including DXA (dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), bone turnover marker, body composition, and hand grip strength for future analyses for FLS model. Modifiable factors for mortality after hip surgery is planned to be identified with nutritional assessment and multi-disciplinary interventions from hospitalization to follow-ups. The proportions of femoral neck, intertrochanteric, and subtrochanteric fractures were 517 (42.0%), 730 (53.6%), and 60 (4.4%), respectively, from 2014 to 2016, which was similar in other studies. Radiologic definition of atypical subtrochanteric fracture was adopted and 17 (1.2%) fractures among 1,361 proximal femoral fractures were identified. Internal fixation showed higher reoperation rate compared to arthroplasty in unstable intertrochanteric fractures (6.1% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.046) with no significant difference in mortality. The KHFR plans to identify outcomes and risk factors associated with second fracture by conducting a 10-year cohort study, with a follow-up every year, using 5,841 baseline participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Present study was registered on Internet-based Clinical Research and Trial management system (iCReaT) as multicenter prospective observational cohort study (Project number: C160022, Date of registration: 22th, Apr, 2016).

Osteoporosis care after hip fracture: Observation from national health insurance database and fracture liaison services.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this research was to report the trend of osteoporosis care after hip fractures from usual care (UC) and to compare the quality of care with those who received fracture liaison services (FLSs). METHODS: Data on osteoporosis care for patients with hip fracture were acquired from the National Health Insurance claims (UC group), and surveys from FLS programs (FLS group). A total of 183,300 patients receiving UC and 3010 patients receiving FLS were studied. For the two groups, common osteoporosis care indicators, such as bone mineral density (BMD) testing rate, antiosteoporosis medication commencement rate, and adherence rate were described. RESULTS: There were 2488 participants (82.7%) in the FLS group who completed Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in 8 weeks, 155 (5.1%) who finished it between 8 weeks and 1 year. Even in 2018, when the DXA completion rate was at its highest, the completion rate in the UC group was only 23.5%. In terms of medication commencement, 2372 FLS patients (78.8%) received treatment within 3 months. Only 24.9% of the UC patients received antiosteoporosis medication within 3 months. Furthermore, antiosteoporosis medication adherence rate was 92.2% after 1 year and 83.9% after 2 years in the FLS group, but these were only 66.5% and 42.7%, respectively, in the UC group. CONCLUSION: Patients who received FLS had more timely BMD exams, antiosteoporosis medication treatment, and higher adherence to antiosteoporosis therapy than those who received UC. The discrepancy in rates of continuing treatment became more significant over time between both groups.