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.

Nonoperative versus operative management of frail institutionalized older patients with a proximal femoral fracture: a cost-utility analysis alongside a multicenter prospective cohort study.

Hip fractures are associated with significant healthcare costs. In frail institutionalized patients, the costs of nonoperative management are less than operative management with comparable short-term quality of life. Nonoperative management of hip fractures in patients at the end of life should be openly discussed with SDM. PURPOSE: The aim was to describe healthcare use with associated costs and to determine cost-utility of nonoperative management (NOM) versus operative management (OM) of frail institutionalized older patients with a proximal femoral fracture. METHODS: This study included institutionalized patients with a limited life expectancy aged ≥ 70 years who sustained a proximal femoral fracture in the Netherlands. Costs of hospital- and nursing home care were calculated. Quality adjusted life years (QALY) were calculated based on EuroQol-5D-5L utility scores at day 7, 14, and 30 and at 3 and 6 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated from a societal perspective. RESULTS: Of the 172 enrolled patients, 88 (51%) patients opted for NOM and 84 (49%) for OM. NOM was associated with lower healthcare costs at 6 months (NOM; €2425 (SD 1.030), OM; €9325 (SD 4242), p < 0.001). The main cost driver was hospital stay (NOM; €738 (SD 841) and OM; €3140 (SD 2636)). The ICER per QALY gained in the OM versus NOM was €76,912 and exceeded the threshold of €20,000 per QALY. The gained QALY were minimal in the OM group in patients who died within 14- and 30-day post-injury, but OM resulted in more than triple the costs. CONCLUSION: OM results in significant higher healthcare costs, mainly due to the length of hospital stay. For frail patients at the end of life, NOM of proximal femoral fractures should be openly discussed in SDM conversations due to the limited gain in QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR7245; date 10-06-2018).

The association between chronic kidney disease, falls, and fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are more likely to experience falls and fractures due to renal osteodystrophy and the high prevalence of risk factors for falls. However, it is not well established how great the risk is for falls and fractures for the different stages of CKD compared to the general population. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess whether, and in which degree, CKD was associated with falls and fractures in adults. A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library was performed on 7 September 2018. All retrospective, cross-sectional, and longitudinal studies of adults (18 years of older) that studied the association between CKD, fractures, and falls were included. Additional studies were identified by cross-referencing. A total of 39 publications were included, of which two publications assessed three types of outcome and four publications assessed two types of outcome. Ten studies focused on accidental falling; seventeen studies focused on hip, femur, and pelvis fractures; seven studies focused on vertebral fractures; and thirteen studies focused on any type of fracture without further specification. Generally, the risk of fractures increased when kidney function worsened, with the highest risks in the patients with stage 5 CKD or dialysis. This effect was most pronounced for hip fractures and any type of fractures. Furthermore, results on the association between CKD and accidental falling were contradictory. Compared to the general population, fractures are highly prevalent in patients with CKD. Besides more awareness of timely fracture risk assessment, there also should be more focus on fall prevention.

Diagnosis of vertebral fractures on lateral chest X-ray: intraobserver agreement of semi-quantitative vertebral fracture assessment.

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice lateral images of the chest are performed for various reasons. As these lateral chest X rays show the vertebrae of the thoracic and thoraco-lumbar region, we wondered if these X-rays can be used for evaluation of vertebral fractures instead of separate thoracic spine X-rays. METHODS: To evaluate the agreement and intraobserver reliability of the semi-quantitative method for vertebral fractures on the lateral chest X-ray (X-chest) in comparison to the lateral thoracic spine X-ray (X-Tspine), two observers scored vertebral fractures on X-Tspine and twice on X-chest, separately,blinded and in different time periods. Agreement and Cohens' kappa were calculated for a diagnosis of any fracture on patient level and on vertebral body level. The study was done in patients visiting an outpatient geriatric day clinic, with a high prevalence of vertebral fractures. RESULTS: 109 patients were included. The intraobserver agreement for X-chest versus X-Tspine was 95-98%for the two levels of fracturing, with a Cohen's kappa of 0.88-0.91. The intraobserver agreement and reliability of the re-test on the X-chest showed an agreement between 91 and 98% with a Cohen's kappa of 0.81-0.93. More vertebrae were visible on the X-chest, mean 10.2, SD 0.66 versus mean 9.8, SD 0.73 on the X-Tspine (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results show good agreement and intraobserver reliability on the X-chest compared to the X-Tspine for visualizing vertebral fractures. The results of this study emphasizes that the routinely performed X-chest is reliable in order to diagnose vertebral fractures.