Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 2.257
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
Ann Intern Med ; 177(1): ITC1-ITC16, 2024 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38190715

ABSTRACT

Osteoporosis is a common systemic skeletal disorder resulting in bone fragility and increased fracture risk. Evidence-based screening strategies improve identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from drug treatment to prevent fracture. In addition, careful consideration of when pharmacotherapy should be started, choice of medication, and duration of treatment maximizes the benefits of fracture prevention while minimizing potential harms of long-term drug exposure.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Secondary Prevention/methods
2.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(9): 1513-1571, 2024 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38831198

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/organization & administration , Continuity of Patient Care/organization & administration , Osteoporosis
3.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(7): 1153-1163, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38622263

ABSTRACT

An integrative literature review was conducted to understand family/caregiver influence on osteoporosis management for older people. Findings include caregivers' overprotection, caregivers' risks for fragility fractures due to caregiving role, poor bone health in caregivers, and caregivers' burden and facilitators. Caregivers should be included in bone health and discharge planning. Literature on family/caregiver influence on osteoporosis management for older people is sparse. Older people are prone to osteoporosis and fragility fractures due to their age, often triggering the need for a caregiver after experiencing a fragility fracture. These fractures pose significant costs to the patient and health systems and are projected to increase with the aging population. This study applied an integrative literature review methodology to key literature findings on family/caregiver influence on osteoporosis management for older people. Key findings include caregivers' tendency to overprotect persons who experience hip fracture by limiting mobilization, thus impeding recovery, caregivers' risks for their own fragility fractures due to the demands of their caregiving role, risks of poor bone health in caregivers, and caregivers' experience of significant burden for which facilitators have been identified. Family caregivers of older people with osteoporosis have unique needs and require support and resources, especially after their loved one experiences a hip fracture. Informal caregivers must be considered in bone health education and discharge planning. They should be considered in the creation of osteoporosis guidelines and within the work of fracture liaison services. More research is needed to increase understanding about family caregiver influence on osteoporosis management.


Subject(s)
Caregivers , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Caregivers/psychology , Aged , Caregiver Burden/psychology , Cost of Illness
4.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(3): 373-389, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38267665

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Transition to Adult Care , Humans , Delphi Technique , Australia , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporosis/therapy , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control
5.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(6): 951-969, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38300316

ABSTRACT

Fracture liaison services (FLS) have been proven clinically effective and cost-effective in preventing subsequent fractures among patients with an existing fragility fracture. Little is known about their monetary benefits such as their return on investment (ROI). This systematic review aimed to investigate the ROI of FLS and identify the FLS characteristics with better ROI. Studies on the cost-effectiveness of FLS published between January 2000 and December 2022 were searched from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Central. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction. ROI was calculated based on the difference between monetary benefits and FLS costs divided by the FLS costs. Subgroup analysis of ROI was performed across FLS types and FLS design details. A total of 23 FLS were included in this review. The majority of them were targeting patients aged over 50 years having fractures without identified sites. The mean ROI of these FLS was 10.49 (with a median ROI of 7.57), and 86.96% of FLS had positive ROI. FLS making treatment recommendations yielded the highest ROI (with a mean ROI of 18.39 and a median of 13.60). Incorporating primary care providers (with a mean ROI of 16.04 and a median of 13.20) or having them as program leaders (with a mean ROI of 12.07 and a median of 12.07) has demonstrated a high ROI. FLS for specific fracture sites had great monetary return. Intensive FLS such as type A and B FLS programs had higher ROI than non-intensive type C and D FLS. This review revealed a 10.49-fold monetary return of FLS. Identified characteristics contributing to greater economic return informed value-for-money FLS designs. Findings highlight the importance of FLS and the feasibility of expanding their contribution in mitigating the economic burden of osteoporotic fracture and are conducive to the promotion of FLS internationally.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Secondary Prevention/organization & administration , Secondary Prevention/economics
6.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(7): 1133-1151, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38536447

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Osteoporotic Fractures , Secondary Prevention , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Aged , Secondary Prevention/organization & administration , Secondary Prevention/methods , Middle Aged , Osteoporosis
7.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(1): 81-91, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37940697

ABSTRACT

Orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) may provide benefits for geriatric fragility fracture patients in terms of more frequent osteoporosis treatment and fewer re-fractures. Yet, we did not find higher costs in OGCM hospitals for re-fractures or antiosteoporotic medication for most fracture sites within 12 months, although antiosteoporotic medication was more often prescribed. PURPOSE: Evidence suggests benefits of orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) for hip fracture patients. Yet, evidence for other fractures is rare. The aim of our study was to conduct an evaluation of economic and health outcomes after the German OGCM for geriatric fragility fracture patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was based on German health and long-term care insurance data. Individuals were 80 years and older, sustained a fragility fracture in 2014-2018, and were treated in hospitals certified for OGCM (ATZ group), providing OGCM without certification (OGCM group) or usual care (control group). Healthcare costs from payer perspective, prescribed medications, and re-fractures were investigated within 6 and 12 months. We used weighted gamma and two-part models and applied entropy balancing to account for the lack of randomization. All analyses were stratified per fracture site. RESULTS: We observed 206,273 patients within 12-month follow-up, of whom 14,100 were treated in ATZ, 133,353 in OGCM, and 58,820 in other hospitals. Total average inpatient costs per patient were significantly higher in the OGCM and particularly ATZ group for all fracture sites, compared to control group. We did not find significant differences in costs for re-fractures or antiosteoporotic medication for most fracture sites, although antiosteoporotic medication was significantly more often observed in the OGCM and particularly ATZ group for hip, pelvic, and humerus fractures. CONCLUSION: The observed healthcare costs were higher in ATZ and OGCM hospitals within 12 months. Antiosteoporotic medication was prescribed more often in both groups for most fracture sites, although the corresponding medication costs did not increase.


Subject(s)
Hip Fractures , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Aged , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Hip Fractures/therapy , Health Care Costs , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporosis/drug therapy
8.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(1): 93-103, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37721557

ABSTRACT

Secondary-level healthcare professionals, mainly rheumatologists and orthopedic surgeons, were invited to participate in an online survey questionnaire to assess knowledge and compliance with osteoporosis management guidelines and strategies, as well as self-reported quality of care. About 51% of the participants admit that they do not implement specific guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in their standard practice and depend on their experience and their clinical judgments. Moreover, although a good percentage (58%) had satisfactory knowledge levels in domains on the risk of osteoporotic fractures and investigations of osteoporosis, 47.5% of the participants did not score satisfactorily in questions on pharmacotherapy, especially for those patients at high risk for fractures. INTRODUCTION: A recently published study demonstrated a treatment gap among those eligible for osteoporosis therapy in Egypt of about 82.1% in postmenopausal women and 100% in men. The current survey aimed to address some of the factors that may contribute to this wide gap. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of secondary care healthcare professionals (both physicians and orthopedic surgeons) who were invited to complete an online questionnaire, which gathered information about physicians' socio-demographic data, knowledge, and compliance with osteoporosis management guidelines and strategies, as well as self-reported quality of care. Additionally, a knowledge score was calculated for all the participants. RESULTS: A good percentage (58%) had a satisfactory knowledge level in domains on the risk of osteoporotic fractures and investigations of osteoporosis; however, 47.5% did not score satisfactorily in questions on pharmacotherapy, especially for those patients at high risk for fractures. CONCLUSIONS: This work has identified some of the barriers to implementing guidelines for osteoporosis and fragility fracture management. In the meantime, it highlights the urgency of intensifying efforts to develop the knowledge and attitude of the healthcare professionals dealing with this condition in Egypt.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Male , Humans , Female , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/complications , Egypt , Bone Density , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Osteoporosis/diagnosis , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(1): 69-79, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37733067

ABSTRACT

This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA), aimed at supporting patients in their decision whether to start anti-osteoporosis medication. People with recent fractures or osteoporosis and health professionals were supportive of the DA initiative. An experimental study been started to assess (cost-)effectiveness of the DA. PURPOSE: At fracture liaison services (FLS), patients with a recent fracture ánd osteoporosis or a prevalent vertebral fracture are advised to start anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM). This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA) to support patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) in their decision about whether to start AOM. METHODS: The DA was developed according to International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A systematic procedure was chosen including scope, design, prototype development, and alpha testing. A previously developed DA for women with osteoporosis was used as a basis. Furthermore, input from literature searches, the Dutch guideline on management of osteoporosis, and from people with a fracture or osteoporosis was used. The updated DA was evaluated during alpha testing. RESULTS: The DA facilitates the decision of patients whether to initiate AOM treatment and provides information on fractures and osteoporosis, general risk factors that increase the likelihood of a subsequent fracture, the role of lifestyle, personalized risk considerations of a subsequent fracture with and without AOM treatment, and AOM options and their characteristics in an option grid. Alpha testing with 15 patients revealed that patient preferences and needs were adequately presented, and several suggestions for improvement (e.g. adding more specific information, simplifying terminology, improving icon use) were accounted for. Participants from the alpha testing recommended use of the DA during outpatient visits. CONCLUSION: Professionals and persons with osteoporosis were supportive of the proposed DA and its usability. The DA could help in a shared decision-making process between patients and HCPs.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Spinal Fractures , Humans , Female , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Risk Factors , Decision Support Techniques
10.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(2): 293-307, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37783759

ABSTRACT

This study assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a fracture liaison service (FLS) compared to no-FLS in the Netherlands from a societal perspective and suggested that FLS was cost-effective in patients with a recent fracture aged 50 years and older. The implementation of FLS could lead to lifetime health-economic benefits. INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to investigate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a fracture liaison service (FLS) compared to no-FLS in the Netherlands from a societal perspective and using real-world data. METHODS: Annual fracture incidence, treatment scenarios as well as treatment initiation in the years 2017-2019 were collected from a large secondary care hospital in the Netherlands. An individual-level, state transition model was designed to simulate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Treatment pathways were differentiated by gender, presence of osteoporosis and/or prevalent vertebral fracture, and treatment status. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: For patients with a recent fracture aged 50 years and older, the presence of an FLS was associated with a lifetime €45 higher cost and 0.11 additional QALY gained leading to an ICER of €409 per QALY gained, indicating FLS was cost-effective compared to no-FLS at the Dutch threshold of €20,000/QALY. The FLS remained cost-effectiveness across different age categories. Our findings were robust in all one-way sensitivity analyses, the higher the treatment initiation rate in FLS, the greater the cost-effective of FLS. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that FLS was cost-effective in 90% of the simulations at the threshold of €20,000/QALY, with women 92% versus men 84% by gender. CONCLUSION: This study provides the first health-economic analysis of FLS in the Netherlands, suggesting the implementation of FLS could lead to lifetime health-economic benefits.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Male , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Osteoporotic Fractures/epidemiology , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/complications , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Osteoporosis/complications , Netherlands/epidemiology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
11.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(8): 1359-1376, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38652313

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Primary Health Care , Secondary Prevention , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Secondary Prevention/methods , Secondary Prevention/organization & administration , Osteoporosis/prevention & control , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic
12.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(8): 1377-1393, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38733394

ABSTRACT

Denosumab and bisphosphonates for primary osteoporosis are generally well-tolerated, but their comparative safety remains unclear. We aimed to explore the comparative safety of denosumab and bisphosphonates in primary osteoporosis. Databases such as PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for relevant peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials published in English (as of December 2023). Trials comparing adverse events (AE) between denosumab and bisphosphonates in patients with primary osteoporosis were investigated. Data were pooled using a fixed- or random-effects model to determine the risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for various AEs in patients treated with denosumab in comparison to patients treated with bisphosphonates. Eleven trials (5,545 patients; follow-up period: 12-24 months) were included in this meta-analysis. All trials had a risk of bias (e.g., reporting bias linked to secondary endpoints and selection bias linked to random allocation). In comparison to bisphosphonates, denosumab was significantly associated with less withdrawal due to AEs (RR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34-0.71), more five-point major adverse cardiovascular events (RR = 2.05; 95% CI 1.03-4.09), more cardiovascular AEs (RR = 1.61; 95% CI 1.07-2.41), more infections (RR = 1.14; 95% CI 1.02-1.27), more upper respiratory tract infections (RR = 1.56; 95% CI 1.08-2.25), less vertebral fractures (RR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.31-0.93), and less abdominal pain (RR = 0.44;95% CI 0.22-0.87). We explored the comparative safety of denosumab and bisphosphonates for primary osteoporosis, some of which could be attributed to their beneficial effects. However, all trials had a risk of bias. Further investigations are required to confirm our results.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Denosumab , Diphosphonates , Osteoporosis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Denosumab/therapeutic use , Denosumab/adverse effects , Diphosphonates/therapeutic use , Diphosphonates/adverse effects , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control
13.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(8): 1461-1467, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38802556

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Recurrence , Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Osteoporotic Fractures/economics , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Aged, 80 and over , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/economics , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/organization & administration , New England , Secondary Prevention/economics , Secondary Prevention/organization & administration
14.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(10): 1737-1748, 2024 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38844560

ABSTRACT

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis to examine the association between hemoglobin (Hb) levels and refracture risk in elderly patients with osteoporotic fractures (OPFs). Our findings suggest a nonlinear relationship exists in females, and females with Hb levels below 10.7 g/dL may be at a higher risk of refracture. INTRODUCTION: Hematopoiesis and bone health have a reciprocal influence on each other. Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of in-depth research on the association between Hb levels and the occurrence of fractures. The present research aimed to investigate the correlation between Hb levels and the rate of refracture within 5 years among individuals with OPFs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was undertaken between 2017 and 2022. The study included 1906 individuals who were inhabitants of Kunshan and were over 60 years old. These individuals had experienced an OPF between January 1, 2017, and July 27, 2022, resulting in their hospitalization. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to evaluate the risk of refracture within 5 years based on the Hb levels acquired during the admission examination, with consideration for sex differences. A nonlinear relationship was identified using smoothed curve fitting and threshold analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare refracture rates between patients with low and high Hb levels. RESULTS: Elderly female patients with OPFs and lower Hb levels exhibited a significantly higher risk of a 5-year refracture. Conversely, no significant associations were observed between the two variables in male patients. A nonlinear correlation was found between Hb levels and the probability of refracture in females, with a turning point identified at 10.7 g/dL of Hb levels. A strong negative association was observed with the five-year refracture rate when Hb levels fell below 10.7 g/dL (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 0.83; P-value = 0.0008). This finding suggests that for every 1 g/dL increase in Hb below 10.7 g/dL, the risk of refracture reduced by 37%. However, no statistically significant association was observed when Hb levels were above 10.7 g/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated a significant negative correlation between Hb levels and the likelihood of refracture in elderly female patients with OPFs and suggested that elderly females with recent OPFs and Hb levels below 10.7 g/dL may be at a higher risk of refracture. Additionally, the Hb levels can serve as an indicator of bone fragility in elderly female patients with OPFs. These findings highlight the importance of monitoring Hb levels as a part of comprehensive management strategies to both assess skeletal health and prevent refractures in this population.


Subject(s)
Hemoglobins , Osteoporotic Fractures , Recurrence , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/blood , Osteoporotic Fractures/epidemiology , Osteoporotic Fractures/etiology , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Female , Male , Retrospective Studies , Aged , Hemoglobins/analysis , Aged, 80 and over , Middle Aged , Sex Factors , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors
15.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(9): 1497-1511, 2024 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38740589

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This systematic review seeks to evaluate the proportion of fragility fracture patients screened in secondary fracture prevention programs who were indicated for pharmacological treatment, received prescriptions for bone-active medications, and initiated the prescribed medication. Additionally, the study aims to analyze equity in pharmacological treatment by examining equity-related variables including age, sex, gender, race, education, income, and geographic location. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to ascertain the proportion of fragility fracture patients indicated for treatment who received prescriptions and/or initiated bone-active medication through secondary fracture prevention programs. We also examined treatment indications reported in studies and eligibility criteria to confirm patients who were eligible for treatment. To compute the pooled proportions for medication prescription and initiation, we carried out a single group proportional meta-analysis. We also extracted the proportions of patients who received a prescription and/or began treatment based on age, sex, race, education, socioeconomic status, location, and chronic conditions. RESULTS: This review included 122 studies covering 114 programs. The pooled prescription rate was 77%, and the estimated medication initiation rate was 71%. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in treatment initiation between the Fracture Liaison Service and other programs. Across all studies, age, sex, and socioeconomic status were the only equity variables reported in relation to treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review emphasizes the need for standardized reporting guidelines in post-fracture interventions. Moreover, considering equity stratifiers in the analysis of health outcomes will help address inequities and improve the overall quality and reach of secondary fracture prevention programs.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Osteoporotic Fractures , Secondary Prevention , Humans , Secondary Prevention/methods , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Osteoporosis/prevention & control , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors
16.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(9): 1487-1496, 2024 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38960982

ABSTRACT

Task Force on 'Clinical Algorithms for Fracture Risk' commissioned by the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) Professional Practice Committee has recommended that FRAX® models in the US do not include adjustment for race and ethnicity. This position paper finds that an agnostic model would unfairly discriminate against the Black, Asian and Hispanic communities and recommends the retention of ethnic and race-specific FRAX models for the US, preferably with updated data on fracture and death hazards. In contrast, the use of intervention thresholds based on a fixed bone mineral density unfairly discriminates against the Black, Asian and Hispanic communities in the US. This position of the Working Group on Epidemiology and Quality of Life of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) is endorsed both by the IOF and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).


Subject(s)
Algorithms , Bone Density , Evidence-Based Medicine , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/ethnology , Risk Assessment/methods , Bone Density/physiology , Osteoporosis/ethnology , United States/epidemiology , Female
17.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(11): 1897-1907, 2024 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39115687

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Previous evidence suggests that bisphosphonates (BPs) may lower the risk of recurrent fractures and enhance functional recovery in patients with fractures. However, there has been controversy regarding the optimal timing of treatment initiation for patients with fragility fractures. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence on the use of BPs during the perioperative period and compared it to both non-perioperative periods and non-usage. METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library published before February 2023, without any language restrictions. The primary outcomes included fracture healing rate, healing time, and new fractures. We also examined a wide range of secondary outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used. RESULTS: A total of 19 clinical trials involving 2543 patients were included in this meta-analysis. When comparing patients with non-perioperative BPs use in 4-6 weeks and approximately 10-12 weeks post-surgically, the overall risk ratios (RRs) of perioperative BPs use for healing rate were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.81, 1.38, p=0.69) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.11, p=0.65), respectively, suggesting no difference in healing rate between perioperative and non-perioperative BP initiation. For healing time, the overall mean difference between perioperative and non-perioperative periods was -0.19 week (95% CI: -1.03, 0.64, p=0.65) at approximately 10-12 weeks, indicating no significant impact of perioperative BP initiation on healing time. In terms of new fractures, the overall RR with BP use was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.17-0.73, p=0.005), when compared to patients without BPs use. This suggests a protective impact of BP use against new fractures compared to patients without BP use. Perioperative BP use was associated with a markedly higher likelihood of having adverse experiences, including fever (RR: 23.78, 95% CI: 8.29, 68.21, p< 0.001), arthralgia (RR: 10.20, 95% CI: 2.41, 43.16, p=0.002), and myalgia (RR: 9.42, 95% CI: 2.54, 34.87, p< 0.001), compared with non-BPs use. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with BP during the perioperative period does not affect the healing process and has positive effects on therapy for patients with fragility fractures. These compelling findings underscore the potential efficacy of BP use during the perioperative period as a viable treatment option for patients with fragility fractures.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Diphosphonates , Fracture Healing , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Diphosphonates/therapeutic use , Diphosphonates/administration & dosage , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/surgery , Fracture Healing/drug effects , Perioperative Care/methods , Clinical Trials as Topic
18.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(11): 1943-1950, 2024 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39093438

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study evaluates sex differences and predictors of anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) use following a hip fracture, with a focus on older men who exhibit higher mortality rates post-fracture compared to women over the age of 65. METHODS: Participants included 151 men and 161 women aged 65 and older with hip fractures. The outcome, AOM use, was assessed at baseline (≤ 22 days of hospitalization) and at 2, 6, and 12 months post-hip fracture. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) modeled sex differences and predictors of AOM use during the year post-fracture in 255 participants with complete baseline data and ≥ 1 follow-up observation. RESULTS: Of the 312 participants, only 53 used AOM at baseline, and 35 initiated use during follow-up. In the unadjusted GEE model, AOM use was significantly less likely in men (OR = 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78) compared to women. For both men and women, baseline use of AOM was a significant predictor (OR = 28.3; 95% CI, 5.4-148.0 vs. 41.6; 95% CI, 14.0-123.0). The other significant predictors by sex were osteoporosis diagnosis (OR = 3.19; 95% CI, 1.16-8.77) and minimal alcohol use (OR = 3.26; 95% CI, 1.34-7.94) for women versus age (OR = 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18) for men. CONCLUSION: In older adults with hip fractures, AOM use is low over the year post-fracture and men are less likely to report AOM use compared to women which has implications for important sex differences in predictors of use. Further research is needed to address overall disparities and sex differences in AOM use.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Hip Fractures , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Male , Female , Hip Fractures/surgery , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Sex Factors , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Sex Characteristics , Follow-Up Studies
19.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(1): 129-141, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37728768

ABSTRACT

While FRAX with BMD could be more precise in estimating the fracture risk, DL-based models were validated to slightly reduce the number of under- and over-treated patients when no BMD measurements were available. The validated models could be used to screen for patients at a high risk of fracture and osteoporosis. PURPOSE: Fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) is useful in classifying the fracture risk level, and precise prediction can be achieved by estimating both clinical risk factors and bone mineral density (BMD) using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). However, DXA is not frequently feasible because of its cost and accessibility. This study aimed to establish the reliability of deep learning (DL)-based alternative tools for screening patients at a high risk of fracture and osteoporosis. METHODS: Participants were enrolled from the National Bone Health Screening Project of Taiwan in this cross-sectional study. First, DL-based models were built to predict the lowest T-score value in either the lumbar spine, total hip, or femoral neck and their respective BMD values. The Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare the agreement between the models and DXA. Second, the predictive model to classify patients with a high fracture risk was built according to the estimated BMD from the first step and the FRAX score without BMD. The performance of the model was compared with the classification based on FRAX with BMD. RESULTS: Approximately 10,827 women (mean age, 65.4 ± 9.4 years) were enrolled. In the prediction of the lumbar spine BMD, total hip BMD, femoral neck BMD, and lowest T-score, the root-mean-square error (RMSE) was 0.099, 0.089, 0.076, and 0.68, respectively. The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a nonsignificant difference between the predictive models and DXA. The FRAX score with femoral neck BMD for major osteoporotic fracture risk was 9.7% ± 6.7%, whereas the risk for hip fracture was 3.3% ± 4.6%. Comparison between the classification of FRAX with and without BMD revealed the accuracy rate, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 78.8%, 64.6%, and 89.9%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), accuracy rate, PPV, and NPV of the classification model were 0.913 (95% confidence interval: 0.904-0.922), 83.5%, 71.2%, and 92.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: While FRAX with BMD could be more precise in estimating the fracture risk, DL-based models were validated to slightly reduce the number of under- and over-treated patients when no BMD measurements were available. The validated models could be used to screen for patients at a high risk of fracture and osteoporosis.


Subject(s)
Deep Learning , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Bone Density , Cross-Sectional Studies , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Assessment , Osteoporosis/diagnostic imaging , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Absorptiometry, Photon , Risk Factors , Femur Neck , Lumbar Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging
20.
Osteoporos Int ; 35(8): 1337-1358, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38587674

ABSTRACT

Antiresorptive medications do not negatively affect fracture healing in humans. Teriparatide may decrease time to fracture healing. Romosozumab has not shown a beneficial effect on human fracture healing. BACKGROUND: Fracture healing is a complex process. Uncertainty exists over the influence of osteoporosis and the medications used to treat it on fracture healing. METHODS: Narrative review authored by the members of the Fracture Working Group of the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF), on behalf of the IOF and the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT). RESULTS: Fracture healing is a multistep process. Most fractures heal through a combination of intramembranous and endochondral ossification. Radiographic imaging is important for evaluating fracture healing and for detecting delayed or non-union. The presence of callus formation, bridging trabeculae, and a decrease in the size of the fracture line over time are indicative of healing. Imaging must be combined with clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes. Animal data support a negative effect of osteoporosis on fracture healing; however, clinical data do not appear to corroborate with this. Evidence does not support a delay in the initiation of antiresorptive therapy following acute fragility fractures. There is no reason for suspension of osteoporosis medication at the time of fracture if the person is already on treatment. Teriparatide treatment may shorten fracture healing time at certain sites such as distal radius; however, it does not prevent non-union or influence union rate. The positive effect on fracture healing that romosozumab has demonstrated in animals has not been observed in humans. CONCLUSION: Overall, there appears to be no deleterious effect of osteoporosis medications on fracture healing. The benefit of treating osteoporosis and the urgent necessity to mitigate imminent refracture risk after a fracture should be given prime consideration. It is imperative that new radiological and biological markers of fracture healing be identified. It is also important to synthesize clinical and basic science methodologies to assess fracture healing, so that a convergence of the two frameworks can be achieved.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Fracture Healing , Osteoporosis , Osteoporotic Fractures , Humans , Fracture Healing/drug effects , Fracture Healing/physiology , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Bone Density Conservation Agents/pharmacology , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Osteoporotic Fractures/physiopathology , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Osteoporosis/physiopathology , Teriparatide/therapeutic use , Teriparatide/pharmacology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL