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.

Pelvic Fragility Fractures: An Opportunity to Improve the Undertreatment of Osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is often undiagnosed until patients experience fragility fractures. Pelvic fractures are common but underappreciated sentinel fractures. Screening patients with a pelvic fracture for osteoporosis may provide an opportunity to initiate appropriate treatments such as anti-osteoporosis therapy to prevent additional fractures. METHODS: This retrospective cohort review examined the management of osteoporosis after pelvic fractures at a large tertiary care center without an established secondary fracture prevention program. Data were extracted from electronic medical records of all new patients with a pelvic fracture who were ≥50 years of age from this center and its affiliated community hospitals from 2008 to 2014. Outcome measures included the initiation of anti-osteoporosis therapy before the fracture, within the year following the fracture, >1 year following the fracture, or never and new osteoporotic fractures within 2 years after a pelvic fracture. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2014, 947 patients presented with pelvic fractures. Of these patients, 27.1% (257 patients) were taking anti-osteoporosis medications before the fracture. Four percent of treatment-naïve patients began anti-osteoporosis therapy within 1 year of fracture, with 1.2% (11 patients) starting after 1 year. Of the treatment-naïve patients, 92.3% (637 patients) were never prescribed anti-osteoporosis therapy. Treatment rates were consistent over time. Within 2 years, 41.0% (388 patients) developed fragility fractures at secondary sites: 12.0% (114 patients) experienced a hip fracture, and 16.4% (155 patients) experienced a vertebral fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoporosis screening and initiation of secondary fracture prevention after a pelvic fracture were inadequate in the study population. Of the patients in this study, 909 (96.0%) never underwent a dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan during the study period. Of the 690 treatment-naïve patients, 637 (92.3%) were never administered anti-osteoporosis medications. Within 2 years, 41.0% of all patients developed additional osteoporotic fractures. This study demonstrates an opportunity to improve bone health by screening for and treating osteoporosis in patients with a pelvic fragility fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Geriatric Population Present an Opportunity to Improve Recognition and Treatment of Osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis remains an undertreated disease entity causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Proximal humerus fractures are a common sentinel fracture, providing an opportunity to intervene with antiresorptive therapy before more subsequent fractures occur. Despite the success of programs aimed to improve postfracture osteoporosis recognition and management, less than 30% of patients presenting with a fragility fracture are diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis nationally. Further elucidation of diagnosis and management of osteoporosis following humerus fracture is warranted. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort review intended to demonstrate the current state and clinical import of osteoporosis diagnosis and management following a humerus fracture at a large academic tertiary care center without an established secondary fracture prevention program. All patients 50 years of age or older who presented with a new humerus fracture between 2008 and 2014 were included. Outcome measures included: The initiation of antiresorptive therapy or screening before fracture, within the year following fracture, or not at all. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred unique geriatric patients were seen for humerus fractures. Nineteen percent of these patients (n = 324) were already on an antiresorptive medication. Three percent of previously untreated patients were started on antiresorptive therapy during the year after their fracture, with 31 or 2% of untreated patients starting at any subsequent point. Seventy-six percent of patients (n = 1301) were never prescribed antiresorptive therapy. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In the absence of a dedicated program to improve secondary fracture prevention following minimal trauma spinal fractures, recognition and treatment of osteoporosis in patients remained inadequate over time despite numerous calls to action on the topic in the orthopedic literature and public health initiatives. Undertreatment of osteoporosis puts patients at increased risk for additional fractures. This study underscores an opportunity to improve bone health by aggressively screening for and treating osteoporosis in geriatric humerus fracture patients.

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.

Rates of osteoporosis screening and treatment following vertebral fracture.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Osteoporosis remains an underrecognized and undertreated disease entity in the orthopaedic setting, accounting for substantial long-term morbidity and mortality. Osteoporosis is often not diagnosed or treated until multiple fractures have occurred. Vertebral compression fractures are the most common sentinel fracture, providing an opportunity to intervene with antiresorptive therapy before more debilitating fractures occur. Little data has been published on osteoporosis screening and treatment following vertebral fractures. Further elucidation of the osteoporosis care gap in these patients is warranted. PURPOSE: To demonstrate the current state of post vertebral fracture osteoporosis management at a large tertiary care center with no established secondary fracture prevention program. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A large tertiary care hospital or one of its affiliated community hospitals. PATIENT SAMPLE: All 2,933 patients, 50 years of age or older, who presented to an emergency department with a new vertebral fracture between 2008 and 2014. OUTCOME MEASURES: The physiological measures are rates of new fractures within 2 years following first vertebral fracture. PATIENT CARE METRICS: Post vertebral fracture rates of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) testing, calcium and vitamin D supplementation, and pharmacotherapy for osteoporosis within 1 year postfracture, and more than 1 year postfracture. Linear trend of the rate of new antiosteoporosis pharmacotherapy among previously antiosteoporosis medication naive patients within 1 year of fracture over time from 2008 to 2014. METHODS: All patients aged 50 years or older presenting to an emergency department with a vertebral fracture between 2008 and 2014 were included. Only an individual's first documented vertebral fracture was considered. Individuals were assessed for DXA screening, calcium and vitamin D supplementation, treatment with an antiosteoporosis medication, and additional fractures following incident vertebral fracture. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and a simple logistic regression. No specific funding was provided for this study. The authors of this study report no relevant financial conflicts of interests or associated biases. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2014, 2,933 unique patients were seen at an included emergency department for one or more vertebral fracture encounters. Ninety-eight percent did not receive a DXA scan within the preceding 2 years or 1 year following fracture. Seven percent of patients were started on antiresorptive therapy after their fracture, with 341 (5%) starting within 1 year of fracture and 211 (2%) starting thereafter. Twenty-one percent (n=616) had taken an antiresorptive medication before their fracture. Seventy three percent (n=2,128) were never prescribed antiresorptive therapy. Treatment rates slightly decreased over time. Thirty eight percent of patients presenting with a vertebral fracture (n=1,115) went on to develop a second fragility fracture within 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of a specific local program to improve secondary fracture prevention following minimal trauma spinal fractures, recognition and treatment of osteoporosis in patients at this institution remained dismal over time despite numerous calls to action on the topic in the orthopaedic literature and elsewhere. Undertreatment of osteoporosis puts patients at increased risk of incurring additional fractures. Within 2 years, 38% of the patients in this sample developed an additional fragility fracture. This study demonstrates a profound post vertebral fracture osteoporosis care gap.

Orthopedic surgeons' views on the osteoporosis care gap and potential solutions: survey results.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is often not recognized until one or more fractures occur, yet post-fracture screening remains uncommon. Orthopedic surgeons are well situated to address this care gap. Both a protocol-based approach and fracture liaison services (FLS) have been proposed. The present surveys assess orthopedists' attitudes to these alternative models for addressing this care gap. METHODS: Two digital surveys were sent to all orthopedic surgeons and orthopedic midlevel providers at a large level 1 trauma center 1.5 years apart. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 47 survey recipients (77%) responded to the first survey; all 55 recipients (100%) responded to the second. Respondents recognized the importance of osteoporosis care, the inadequacy of current measures, and the potential of orthopedic surgeons to help address this gap. Respondents reported regular encounters with fragility fracture patients but limited familiarity with core aspects of osteoporosis screening and treatment, especially pharmacotherapy. While some respondents (40%) reported willingness to attempt a protocol-based approach to addressing this care gap, many others expressed reservations (60%) and support for a FLS-based approach was much higher (95%). CONCLUSIONS: A fracture liaison service model best fits the observed attitudes of orthopedic surgeons at this level 1 trauma center relative to a protocol-based approach. Protocol-based approaches may be preferable in alternate settings.