RESUMEN
We assessed the cost-effectiveness of two models of osteoporosis care after upper extremity fragility fracture using a high-intensity Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) Case-Manager intervention versus a low-intensity FLS (ie, Active Control), and both relative to usual care. This analysis used data from a pragmatic patient-level parallel-arm comparative effectiveness trial of 361 community-dwelling participants 50 years or older with upper extremity fractures undertaken at a Canadian academic hospital. We used a decision-analytic Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the three treatment alternatives. The perspective was health service payer; the analytical horizon was lifetime; costs and health outcomes were discounted by 3%. Costs were expressed in 2016 Canadian dollars (CAD) and the health effect was measured by quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The average age of enrolled patients was 63 years and 89% were female. Per patient cost of the Case Manager and Active Control interventions were $66CAD and $18CAD, respectively. Compared to the Active Control, the Case Manager saved $333,000, gained seven QALYs, and averted nine additional fractures per 1000 patients. Compared to usual care, the Case Manager saved $564,000, gained 14 QALYs, and incurred 18 fewer fractures per 1000 patients, whereas the Active Control saved $231,000, gained seven QALYs, and incurred nine fewer fractures per 1000 patients. Although both interventions dominated usual care, the Case Manager intervention also dominated the Active Control. In 5000 probabilistic simulations, the probability that the Case Manager intervention was cost-effective was greater than 75% whereas the Active Control intervention was cost-effective in less than 20% of simulations. In summary, although the adoption of either of these approaches into clinical settings should lead to cost savings, reduced fractures, and increased quality-adjusted life for older adults following upper extremity fracture, the Case Manager intervention would be the most likely to be cost-effective. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/economía , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/complicaciones , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/economía , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Extremidad Superior/patología , Árboles de Decisión , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Cadenas de Markov , Persona de Mediana Edad , Método de Montecarlo , Probabilidad , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Importance: Falls result in substantial burden for patients and health care systems, and given the aging of the population worldwide, the incidence of falls continues to rise. Objective: To assess the potential effectiveness of interventions for preventing falls. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ageline databases from inception until April 2017. Reference lists of included studies were scanned. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of fall-prevention interventions for participants aged 65 years and older. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted. Main Outcomes and Measures: Injurious falls and fall-related hospitalizations. Results: A total of 283 RCTs (159â¯910 participants; mean age, 78.1 years; 74% women) were included after screening of 10â¯650 titles and abstracts and 1210 full-text articles. Network meta-analysis (including 54 RCTs, 41â¯596 participants, 39 interventions plus usual care) suggested that the following interventions, when compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in injurious falls: exercise (odds ratio [OR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.79]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.67 [95% CI, -1.10 to -0.24]); combined exercise and vision assessment and treatment (OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.38]; ARD, -1.79 [95% CI, -2.63 to -0.96]); combined exercise, vision assessment and treatment, and environmental assessment and modification (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.70]; ARD, -1.19 [95% CI, -2.04 to -0.35]); and combined clinic-level quality improvement strategies (eg, case management), multifactorial assessment and treatment (eg, comprehensive geriatric assessment), calcium supplementation, and vitamin D supplementation (OR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.55]; ARD, -2.08 [95% CI, -3.56 to -0.60]). Pairwise meta-analyses for fall-related hospitalizations (2 RCTs; 516 participants) showed no significant association between combined clinic- and patient-level quality improvement strategies and multifactorial assessment and treatment relative to usual care (OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.33 to 1.81]). Conclusions and Relevance: Exercise alone and various combinations of interventions were associated with lower risk of injurious falls compared with usual care. Choice of fall-prevention intervention may depend on patient and caregiver values and preferences.
Asunto(s)
Prevención de Accidentes/métodos , Accidentes por Caídas/prevención & control , Ejercicio Físico , Trastornos de la Visión/diagnóstico , Anciano , Calcio/uso terapéutico , Suplementos Dietéticos , Planificación Ambiental , Femenino , Evaluación Geriátrica , Humanos , Masculino , Vitamina D/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Observational studies report consistent associations between low vitamin D concentration and increased glycemia and risk of type 2 diabetes, but results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are mixed. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to systematically review RCTs that report on the effects of vitamin D supplementation on glucose homeostasis or diabetes prevention. DATA SOURCES: Sources of data for the study were MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, and Science Citation Index from inception to June 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Study selection was trials that compared vitamin D3 supplementation with placebo or a non-vitamin D supplement in adults with normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes, or type 2 diabetes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers collected data and assessed trial quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects models were used to estimate mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios. The main outcomes of interest were homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, homeostasis model assessment of ß-cell function, hemoglobin A1c levels, fasting blood glucose, incident diabetes, and adverse events. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five trials (43 407 patients) with variable risk of bias were included. Vitamin D had no significant effects on insulin resistance [homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance: MD -0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.30 to 0.22, I-squared statistic (I(2)) = 45%], insulin secretion (homeostasis model of ß-cell function: MD 1.64; 95% CI -25.94 to 29.22, I(2) = 40%), or hemoglobin A1c (MD -0.05%; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.03, I(2) = 55%) compared with controls. Four RCTs reported on the progression to new diabetes and found no effect of vitamin D (odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.10, I(2) = 0%). Adverse events were rare, and there was no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from available trials shows no effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on glucose homeostasis or diabetes prevention. Definitive conclusions may be limited in the context of the moderate degree of heterogeneity, variable risk of bias, and short-term follow-up duration of the available evidence to date.
Asunto(s)
Glucemia/metabolismo , Colecalciferol/administración & dosificación , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/prevención & control , Estado Prediabético/prevención & control , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/metabolismo , Suplementos Dietéticos , Homeostasis/efectos de los fármacos , Homeostasis/fisiología , Humanos , Estado Prediabético/metabolismo , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Vitaminas/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
Diverging international trends in fracture rates have been observed, with most reports showing that fracture rates have stabilized or decreased in North American and many European populations. We studied two complementary population-based historical cohorts from the Province of Manitoba, Canada (1996-2006) to determine whether declining osteoporotic fracture rates in Canada are attributable to trends in obesity, osteoporosis treatment, or bone mineral density (BMD). The Population Fracture Registry included women aged 50 years and older with major osteoporotic fractures, and was used to assess impact of changes in osteoporosis treatment. The BMD Registry included all women aged 50 years and older undergoing BMD tests, and was used to assess impact of changes in obesity and BMD. Model-based estimates of temporal changes in fracture rates (Fracture Registry) were calculated. Temporal changes in obesity and BMD and their association with fracture rates (BMD Registry) were estimated. In the Fracture Registry (n=27,341), fracture rates declined 1.6% per year (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3% to 2.0%). Although osteoporosis treatment increased from 5.6% to 17.4%, the decline in fractures was independent of osteoporosis treatment. In the BMD Registry (n=36,587), obesity increased from 12.7% to 27.4%. Femoral neck BMD increased 0.52% per year and lumbar spine BMD increased 0.32% per year after covariate adjustment (p<0.001). Major osteoporotic fracture rates decreased in models that did not include femoral neck BMD (fully adjusted annual change -1.8%; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.5), but adjusting for femoral neck BMD accounted for the observed reduction (annual change -0.5%; 95% CI, -1.8 to +1.0). In summary, major osteoporotic fracture rates declined substantially and linearly from 1996 to 2006, and this was explained by improvements in BMD rather than greater rates of obesity or osteoporosis treatment.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Fracturas Óseas/complicaciones , Obesidad/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Fracturas Óseas/fisiopatología , Humanos , Manitoba/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis/fisiopatología , Vigilancia de la PoblaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: For outpatients with pneumonia, guidelines recommend empiric antibiotics and some suggest macrolides are preferred agents. We hypothesized that both guideline-concordant antibiotics and macrolides would be associated with reduced mortality. METHODS: All outpatients with pneumonia assessed at 7 Emergency Departments in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada were enrolled in a population-based registry that included clinical-radiographic data, Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) and treatments. Guideline-concordant regimens included macrolides and respiratory fluoroquinolones; other regimens were "discordant". Main outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The study included 2973 outpatients; mean age 51 years, 47% female, most had mild pneumonia (73% PSI Class I-II). Over 30-days, 38 (1%) patients died, 228 (8%) were hospitalized, and 253 (9%) reached the endpoint of death or hospitalization. Most (2845 [96%]) patients received guideline-concordant antibiotics. Compared to patients receiving discordant antibiotics, those receiving guideline-concordant antibiotics were less likely to die within 30-days (8 [6%] versus 30 [1%], adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.09-0.59, p = 0.002). Within the guideline-concordant subgroup, compared to the 947 (33%) patients treated with fluoroquinolones, those receiving macrolides [1847 (64%)] were less likely to die (25 [3%] versus 4 [0.2%], adjusted OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.86, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In outpatients with pneumonia, treatment with guideline-concordant antibiotics and macrolides were both associated with mortality reduction.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Macrólidos/uso terapéutico , Neumonía Bacteriana/tratamiento farmacológico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Adulto , Anciano , Alberta/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/tratamiento farmacológico , Vías Clínicas/normas , Utilización de Medicamentos/normas , Utilización de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Fluoroquinolonas/uso terapéutico , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital/normas , Neumonía Bacteriana/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pain management is integral to the management of hip fracture. PURPOSE: To review the benefits and harms of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions for managing pain after hip fracture. DATA SOURCES: 25 electronic databases (January 1990 to December 2010), gray literature, trial registries, and reference lists, with no language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Multiple reviewers independently and in duplicate screened 9357 citations to identify randomized, controlled trials (RCTs); nonrandomized, controlled trials (non-RCTs); and cohort studies of pain management techniques in older adults after acute hip fracture. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent, duplicate data extraction and quality assessment were conducted, with discrepancies resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. Data extracted included study characteristics, inclusion and exclusion criteria, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: 83 unique studies (64 RCTs, 5 non-RCTs, and 14 cohort studies) were included that addressed nerve blockade (n = 32), spinal anesthesia (n = 30), systemic analgesia (n = 3), traction (n = 11), multimodal pain management (n = 2), neurostimulation (n = 2), rehabilitation (n = 1), and complementary and alternative medicine (n = 2). Overall, moderate evidence suggests that nerve blockades are effective for relieving acute pain and reducing delirium. Low-level evidence suggests that preoperative traction does not reduce acute pain. Evidence was insufficient on the benefits and harms of most interventions, including spinal anesthesia, systemic analgesia, multimodal pain management, acupressure, relaxation therapy, transcutaneous electrical neurostimulation, and physical therapy regimens, in managing acute pain. LIMITATIONS: No studies evaluated outcomes of chronic pain or exclusively examined participants from nursing homes or with cognitive impairment. Systemic analgesics (narcotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) were understudied during the search period. CONCLUSION: Nerve blockade seems to be effective in reducing acute pain after hip fracture. Sparse data preclude firm conclusions about the relative benefits or harms of many other pain management interventions for patients with hip fracture. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Asunto(s)
Fracturas de Cadera/complicaciones , Manejo del Dolor , Acupresión , Analgésicos/uso terapéutico , Anestesia Raquidea , Terapia Combinada , Investigación sobre la Eficacia Comparativa , Delirio/etiología , Delirio/prevención & control , Humanos , Bloqueo Nervioso , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/etiología , Terapia por Relajación , Tracción , Estimulación Eléctrica Transcutánea del NervioRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We previously demonstrated that a case manager intervention improved osteoporosis (OP) treatment within 6 months of hip fracture compared with usual care. The second phase of the randomized trial compared a less intensive intervention, facilitated bone mineral density (BMD) testing, with usual care and the case manager intervention. METHODS: We initially randomized 220 hip fracture patients to either an OP case manager intervention or usual care. After completing the original trial at 6 months postfracture, usual care patients were reallocated to facilitated BMD testing; BMD tests were arranged and results sent to primary care physicians. Main outcomes (bisphosphonate treatment, BMD tests, receipt of appropriate care) were reascertained 1 year following hip fracture and compared with outcomes achieved by the OP case manager intervention and usual care. RESULTS: Compared with usual care, facilitated BMD testing increased testing from 29% to 68% (P < 0.001), bisphosphonate use from 22% to 38% (P < 0.001), and receipt of appropriate care from 26% to 45% (P < 0.001). The more intensive (70 versus 30 minutes) and expensive ($56 versus $24 Canadian per patient) OP case manager intervention led to significantly higher bisphosphonate use (54% versus 38%; P = 0.03), receipt of appropriate care (71% versus 45%; P < 0.001), and more BMD testing (80% versus 68%; P = 0.06) than usual care followed by facilitated BMD testing. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, 2 different inexpensive interventions resulted in significant increases in appropriate management of OP after hip fracture. The magnitude of improvements achieved was directly related to the intensity of the interventions.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Manejo de Caso , Fracturas de Cadera/rehabilitación , Osteoporosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Absorciometría de Fotón , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Vías Clínicas , Difosfonatos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine (PPV) does not prevent community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), it might still improve outcomes in those who develop pneumonia. We tested this hypothesis using a population-based cohort of hospitalized patients with CAP. METHODS: From 2000 to 2002, we prospectively collected data on all adults with CAP admitted to 6 hospitals in Capital Health, the largest integrated health delivery system in Canada. Polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine status was ascertained by interview, medical record review, and contact with physicians and community health offices. The primary outcome was the composite of in-hospital mortality or intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Multivariable regression was used to determine the independent association between PPV use and outcomes, after adjusting for patient characteristics, pneumonia severity, and propensity scores. RESULTS: Of the 3415 patients with CAP (median age, 75 years), 46% were female, 62% had severe pneumonia, and 22% had prior PPV. Overall, 624 patients died or were admitted to an ICU. Polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine was protective from reaching this composite end point (73/760 [10%] vs 551/2655 [21%] for unvaccinated patients; P < .001), mostly a result of reduced ICU admission (2/760 [<1%] vs 349/2655 [13%]). The propensity-adjusted odds of death or ICU admission was 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.92; P = .02) for patients who had received PPV. Only 215 of 2416 patients (9%) eligible for PPV at hospital discharge were vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CAP who had prior PPV had about a 40% lower rate of mortality or ICU admission compared with those who were not vaccinated. This provides additional support for recommending PPV to those at risk of pneumonia.