Occurrence of comorbidity following osteoarthritis diagnosis: a cohort study in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of comorbidity following diagnosis of knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: A cohort study was conducted using the Integrated Primary Care Information database, containing electronic health records of 2.5 million patients from the Netherlands. Adults at risk for OA were included. Diagnosis of knee or hip OA (=exposure) and 58 long-term comorbidities (=outcome) were defined by diagnostic codes following the International Classification of Primary Care coding system. Time between the start of follow-up and incident diagnosis of OA was defined as unexposed, and between diagnosis of OA and the end of follow-up as exposed. Age and sex adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) comparing comorbidity rates in exposed and unexposed patient time were estimated with 99.9% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 1,890,712 patients. For 30 of the 58 studied comorbidities, exposure to knee OA showed a HR larger than 1. Largest positive associations (HR with (99.9% CIs)) were found for obesity 2.55 (2.29-2.84) and fibromyalgia 2.06 (1.53-2.77). For two conditions a HR < 1 was found, other comorbidities showed no association with exposure to knee OA. For 26 comorbidities, exposure to hip OA showed a HR larger than 1. The largest were found for polymyalgia rheumatica 1.81 (1.41-2.32) and fibromyalgia 1.70 (1.10-2.63). All other comorbidities showed no associations with hip OA. CONCLUSION: This study showed that many comorbidities were diagnosed more often in patients with knee or hip OA. This suggests that the management of OA should consider the risk of other long-term-conditions.

Chronic Disease in China: Geographic and Socioeconomic Determinants Among Persons Aged 60 and Older.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to reveal the epidemic characteristics of chronic diseases among the Chinese older population and provide empirical strategies for the prevention and management of chronic diseases in the seniors in China. DESIGN: A national cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 224,640 Chinese residents aged 60 and older were invited, and 222,179 (98.9%) participated in our survey. METHODS: Standardized questionnaires were used to collect socioeconomic information and self-reported physician-diagnosed chronic diseases. The associations between individual socioeconomic status and chronic diseases were estimated using generalized linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: The national prevalence of any chronic diseases was 81.1% (95% CI 80.9-81.2), representing 179.9 million Chinese older adults. The prevalence increased with aging and peaked at 80 to 84 years old (87.2, 95% CI 86.7-87.7), this is consistent with studies in developing countries. Women (84.2, 84.0-84.4), rural residents (82.6, 82.4-82.8), and ethnic minorities (82.2, 81.5-82.8) had a higher prevalence than men (77.7, 77.4-77.9), urban residents (79.7, 79.5-79.9), and people of Han ethnicity (81.0, 80.8-81.2), respectively. For provincial prevalence, Tibet had the highest prevalence of chronic diseases (91.8, 91.5-92.0), and Fujian had the lowest (72.7, 72.5-72.9). The absolute differences between the highest and lowest provinces for the specific chronic condition ranged from 2.78% for cancer to 36.3% for cardiovascular diseases. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Chronic diseases were highly prevalent among older adults in China and varied geographically. Advanced socioeconomic status appeared to have double-edged impacts on the prevalence of chronic diseases. Our findings support that reducing gender and geographic disparities should be prioritized in China's chronic disease prevention and management, and an affordable long-term care services system for older adults should be established urgently in China.

Evaluating a novel approach to stimulate open science collaborations: a case series of "study-a-thon" events within the OHDSI and European IMI communities.

Objective: We introduce and review the concept of a study-a-thon as a catalyst for open science in medicine, utilizing harmonized real world, observation health data, tools, skills, and methods to conduct network studies, generating insights for those wishing to use study-a-thons for future research. Materials and Methods: A series of historical study-a-thons since 2017 to present were reviewed for thematic insights as to the opportunity to accelerate the research method to conduct studies across therapeutic areas. Review of publications and experience of the authors generated insights to illustrate the conduct of study-a-thons, key learning, and direction for those wishing to conduct future such study-a-thons. Results: A review of six study-a-thons have provided insights into their scientific impact, and 13 areas of insights for those wishing to conduct future study-a-thons. Defining aspects of the study-a-thon method for rapid, collaborative research through network studies reinforce the need to clear scientific rationale, tools, skills, and methods being collaboratively to conduct a focused study. Well-characterized preparatory, execution and postevent phases, coalescing skills, experience, data, clinical input (ensuring representative clinical context to the research query), and well-defined, logical steps in conducting research via the study-a-thon method are critical. Conclusions: A study-a-thon is a focused multiday research event generating reliable evidence on a specific medical topic across different countries and health systems. In a study-a-thon, a multidisciplinary team collaborate to create an accelerated contribution to scientific evidence and clinical practice. It critically accelerates the research process, without inhibiting the quality of the research output and evidence generation, through a reproducible process.

Is it time to consider population screening for fracture risk in postmenopausal women? A position paper from the International Osteoporosis Foundation Epidemiology/Quality of Life Working Group.

The IOF Epidemiology and Quality of Life Working Group has reviewed the potential role of population screening for high hip fracture risk against well-established criteria. The report concludes that such an approach should strongly be considered in many health care systems to reduce the burden of hip fractures. INTRODUCTION: The burden of long-term osteoporosis management falls on primary care in most healthcare systems. However, a wide and stable treatment gap exists in many such settings; most of which appears to be secondary to a lack of awareness of fracture risk. Screening is a public health measure for the purpose of identifying individuals who are likely to benefit from further investigations and/or treatment to reduce the risk of a disease or its complications. The purpose of this report was to review the evidence for a potential screening programme to identify postmenopausal women at increased risk of hip fracture. METHODS: The approach took well-established criteria for the development of a screening program, adapted by the UK National Screening Committee, and sought the opinion of 20 members of the International Osteoporosis Foundation's Working Group on Epidemiology and Quality of Life as to whether each criterion was met (yes, partial or no). For each criterion, the evidence base was then reviewed and summarized. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The report concludes that evidence supports the proposal that screening for high fracture risk in primary care should strongly be considered for incorporation into many health care systems to reduce the burden of fractures, particularly hip fractures. The key remaining hurdles to overcome are engagement with primary care healthcare professionals, and the implementation of systems that facilitate and maintain the screening program.

Comparative risk of acute myocardial infarction for anti-osteoporosis drugs in primary care: a meta-analysis of propensity-matched cohort findings from the UK Clinical Practice Research Database and the Catalan SIDIAP Database.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of acute myocardial infarction in patients taking osteoporosis medication. Patients were taken from the SIDIAP or CPRD database and were matched using propensity scores. Patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease taking SERMs were at an increased risk. The results favour the cardiovascular safety of alendronate as a first-line choice for osteoporosis treatment. INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the comparative safety of anti-osteoporosis drugs based on the observed risk of acute myocardial infarction while on treatment in a primary care setting. METHODS: This is a propensity-matched cohort study and meta-analysis. This study was conducted in two primary care record databases covering UK NHS (CPRD) and Catalan healthcare (SIDIAP) patients during 1995-2014 and 2006-2014, respectively. The outcome was acute myocardial infarction while on treatment. Users of alendronate (reference group) were compared to those of (1) other oral bisphosphonates (OBP), (2) strontium ranelate (SR), and (3) selective oestrogen receptor modulator (SERM), after matching on baseline characteristics (socio-demographics, fracture risk factors, comorbidities, and concomitant drug use) using propensity scores. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data on confounders and competing risk modelling for the calculation of relative risk (sub-distribution hazard ratios (SHR)) according to therapy. Country-specific data were analysed individually and meta-analysed. RESULTS: A 10% increased risk of acute myocardial infarction was found in users of other bisphosphonates as compared to alendronate users within CPRD. The meta-analysis of CPRD and SIDIAP results showed a 9% increased risk in users of other bisphosphonate as compared to alendronate users. Sensitivity analysis showed SERMS users with diabetes and chronic kidney disease were at an elevated risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides additional data on the risk of acute myocardial infarction in patients receiving osteoporosis treatment. The results favour the cardiovascular safety of alendronate as a first-line choice for osteoporosis treatment.

Clustering of comorbidities and associated outcomes in people with osteoarthritis - A UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the clusters of chronic conditions present in people with osteoarthritis and the associated risk factors and health outcomes. METHODS: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD was used to identify people diagnosed with incident osteoarthritis (n = 221,807) between 1997 and 2017 and age (±2 years), gender, and practice matched controls (no osteoarthritis, n = 221,807) from UK primary care. Clustering of people was examined for 49 conditions using latent class analysis. The associations between cluster membership and covariates were quantified by odds ratios (OR) using multinomial logistic regression. General practice (GP) consultations, hospitalisations, and all-cause mortality rates were compared across the clusters identified at the time of first diagnosis of osteoarthritis (index date). RESULTS: In both groups, conditions largely grouped around five clusters: relatively healthy; cardiovascular (CV), musculoskeletal-mental health (MSK-MH), CV-musculoskeletal (CV-MSK) and metabolic (MB). In the osteoarthritis group, compared to the relatively healthy cluster, strong associations were seen for 1) age with all clusters; 2) women with the MB cluster (OR 5.55: 5.14-5.99); 3) obesity with the CV-MSK (OR 2.11: 2.03-2.20) and CV clusters (OR 2.03: 1.97-2.09). The CV-MSK cluster in the osteoarthritis group had the highest number of GP consultations and hospitalisations, and the mortality risk was 2.45 (2.33-2.58) times higher compared to the relatively healthy cluster. CONCLUSIONS: Of the five identified clusters, CV-MSK, CV, and MSK-MH are more common in OA and CV-MSK cluster had higher health utilisation. Further research is warranted to better understand the mechanistic pathways and clinical implications.

Elevated blood pressure, antihypertensive medications and bone health in the population: revisiting old hypotheses and exploring future research directions.

Blood pressure and bone metabolism appear to share commonalities in their physiologic regulation. Specific antihypertensive drug classes may also influence bone mineral density. However, current evidence from existing observational studies and randomised trials is insufficient to establish causal associations for blood pressure and use of blood pressure-lowering drugs with bone health outcomes, particularly with the risks of osteoporosis and fractures. The availability and access to relevant large-scale biomedical data sources as well as developments in study designs and analytical approaches provide opportunities to examine the nature of the association between blood pressure and bone health more reliably and in greater detail than has ever been possible. It is unlikely that a single source of data or study design can provide a definitive answer. However, with appropriate considerations of the strengths and limitations of the different data sources and analytical techniques, we should be able to advance our understanding of the role of raised blood pressure and its drug treatment on the risks of low bone mineral density and fractures. As elevated blood pressure is highly prevalent and blood pressure-lowering drugs are widely prescribed, even small effects of these exposures on bone health outcomes could be important at a population level.

Incidence and prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in Denmark from 1998 to 2018: a nationwide register-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence and prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the adult Danish population. METHOD: In this nationwide register-based cohort study, patients with incident RA between 1998 and the end of 2018 were identified using Danish administrative registries. The age- and sex-standardized incidence rate (IR), incidence proportion (IP), lifetime risk (LR), and point prevalence (PP) of RA were calculated. RA was defined as a first-time RA diagnosis registered in the Danish National Patient Registry combined with a redeemed prescription of a conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug in the following year. In addition, three different case definitions of RA were explored. RESULTS: The overall age- and sex-standardized IR of RA from 1998 to 2018 was 35.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 35.1-35.9] per 100 000 person-years while the IP was 35.2 (95% CI 34.8-35.5) per 100 000 individuals. The IR was two-fold higher for women than for men. The LR of RA ranged from 2.3% to 3.4% for women and from 1.1% to 1.5% for men, depending on the RA case definition used. The overall PP of RA was 0.6% (95% CI 0.5-0.6%) in 2018: 0.8% (95% CI 0.7-0.8%) for women and 0.3% (95% CI 0.3-0.4%) for men. The prevalence increased about 1.5-fold from 2000 to 2018. CONCLUSION: The IR and PP were approximately two-fold higher for women than for men. The prevalence of RA in Denmark increased significantly from 2000 to 2018. The RA case definition had more impact on the results than the choice of denominator.

Diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in chronic kidney disease stages 4 to 5D: a call for a shift from nihilism to pragmatism.

The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) CKD-MBD working group, in collaboration with the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis Foundation, published a position paper for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 4-5D (eGFR < 30 ml/min 1.73 m2). The present article reports and summarizes the main recommendations included in this 2021 document. The following areas are reviewed: diagnosis of osteoporosis; risk factors for fragility fractures; fracture risk assessment; intervention thresholds for pharmacological intervention; general and pharmacological management of osteoporosis; monitoring of treatment, and systems of care, all in patients with CKD stages 4-5D. Guidance is provided for clinicians caring for CKD stages 4-5D patients with osteoporosis, allowing for a pragmatic individualized diagnostic and therapeutic approach as an alternative to current variations in care and treatment nihilism.

The treatment gap after major osteoporotic fractures in Denmark 2005-2014: a combined analysis including both prescription-based and hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications.

This study demonstrates a substantial and persistent anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in men and women ≥50 years old who sustained major osteoporotic fracture(s) between 2005 and 2014 in Denmark. This was not substantially reduced by including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis treatments. Strengthened post-fracture organization of care and secondary fracture prevention is highly needed. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Danish anti-osteoporosis treatment gap from 2005 to 2014 in patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and to assess the impact of including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) on the treatment gap among these patients. METHODS: In this retrospective, registry-based study, we included men and women aged 50 years or older and living in Denmark, who sustained at least one MOF between 2005 and 2014. We applied a repeated cross-sectional design to generate cohorts of patients sustaining a first MOF, hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fracture, respectively, within each calendar year. We evaluated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients within each cohort not receiving treatment with AOM within 1 year of the fracture. Hospital-administered AOM was identified by SKS code. RESULTS: The treatment gap among MOF patients decreased from 85% in 2005 to 79% in 2014. The gap was smaller among hip and vertebral fracture patients as compared to humerus and forearm fracture patients, and it was smaller in women than in men. The use of hospital-administered AOM was relatively uncommon, with a maximum of 0.9% of MOF patients initiating hospital-administered AOM (in 2012). We observed substantial variations in this proportion between fracture types and gender. Hospital-administered AOM was most commonly used among vertebral fracture patients. CONCLUSION: A significant treatment gap among patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture was present throughout our analysis, and including hospital-administered AOM did not significantly improve the treatment gap assessment. Improved secondary fracture prevention is urgently needed.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of strontium ranelate and bisphosphonates: a multi-database study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance.

Strontium ranelate use, compared with oral bisphosphonates, is not associated with increased risk of AMI in patients with no contraindications for SR use. However, current strontium ranelate (compared with current bisphosphonate) appears associated with 25-30% excess risk of VTE and 35% excess risk of CVDeath. INTRODUCTION: Evaluate the risk of cardiac and thromboembolic events among new users of SR and oral BPs without contraindications for SR. METHODS: We conducted three multi-national, multi-database (Aarhus-Denmark, HSD-Italy, IPCI-Netherlands, SIDIAP-Spain, THIN-UK) case-control studies nested within a cohort of new users of SR/BP. We matched cases of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and cardiovascular death (CVDeath), up to 10 controls on gender, year of birth, index date, and country. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) according to current SR vs current BP use and current vs past SR use, adjusting for potential confounders. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: No excess risk of AMI (5477 cases/54,674 controls) was found with current SR vs current BP (OR 0.89 (95%CI 0.70, 1.12)) nor with current vs past SR use (0.71(0.56, 0.91)). For VTE (5614 cases/6036 controls), an excess risk was found with current SR compared with current BP use, 1.24 (0.96, 1.61), and current vs past SR use, 1.30 (1.04, 1.62). For CVDeath (3019 cases/29,871 controls), an increased risk was seen with current SR vs current BP use, 1.35 (1.02, 1.80), but not with current vs past SR use (0.68 (0.48, 0.96)). CONCLUSION: In patients without contraindications for SR, we found no evidence of an increased risk of AMI but a 25-30% excess risk of VTE and a 35% excess risk of CVDeath with current SR vs current BP users. This is despite a reduction in risk in CVDeath with current vs past SR users. The latter disparity could still be partially explained by cessation of preventative therapies in end-of-life or residual confounding by indication.

Is there a role for menopausal hormone therapy in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis?

We provide an evidence base and guidance for the use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) for the maintenance of skeletal health and prevention of future fractures in recently menopausal women. Despite controversy over associated side effects, which has limited its use in recent decades, the potential role for MHT soon after menopause in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis is increasingly recognized. We present a narrative review of the benefits versus risks of using MHT in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Current literature suggests robust anti-fracture efficacy of MHT in patients unselected for low BMD, regardless of concomitant use with progestogens, but with limited evidence of persisting skeletal benefits following cessation of therapy. Side effects include cardiovascular events, thromboembolic disease, stroke and breast cancer, but the benefit-risk profile differs according to the use of opposed versus unopposed oestrogens, type of oestrogen/progestogen, dose and route of delivery and, for cardiovascular events, timing of MHT use. Overall, the benefit-risk profile supports MHT treatment in women who have recently (< 10 years) become menopausal, who have menopausal symptoms and who are less than 60 years old, with a low baseline risk for adverse events. MHT should be considered as an option for the maintenance of skeletal health in women, specifically as an additional benefit in the context of treatment of menopausal symptoms, when commenced at the menopause, or shortly thereafter, in the context of a personalized benefit-risk evaluation.

Assessment of Cardiovascular Safety of Anti-Osteoporosis Drugs.

The incidence of osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease increases with age, and there are potentially shared mechanistic associations between the two conditions. It is therefore highly relevant to understand the cardiovascular implications of osteoporosis medications. These are presented in this narrative review. Calcium supplementation could theoretically cause atheroma formation via calcium deposition, and in one study was found to be associated with myocardial infarction, but this has not been replicated. Vitamin D supplementation has been extensively investigated for cardiac benefit, but no consistent effect has been found. Despite findings in the early 21st century that menopausal hormone therapy was associated with coronary artery disease and venous thromboembolism (VTE), this therapy is now thought to be potentially safe (from a cardiac perspective) if started within the first 10 years of the menopause. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are associated with increased risk of VTE and may be related to fatal strokes (a subset of total strokes). Bisphosphonates could theoretically provide protection against atheroma. However, data from randomised trials and observational studies have neither robustly supported this nor consistently demonstrated the potential association with atrial fibrillation. Denosumab does not appear to be associated with cardiovascular disease and, although parathyroid hormone analogues are associated with palpitations and dizziness, no association with a defined cardiovascular pathology has been demonstrated. Finally, romosozumab has been shown to have a possible cardiovascular signal, and therefore post-market surveillance of this therapy will be vital.

Best Practice Framework of Fracture Liaison Services in Spain and their coordination with Primary Care.

The coordination of Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) with Primary Care (PC) is necessary for the continuity of care of patients with fragility fractures. This study proposes a Best Practice Framework (BPF) and performance indicators for the implementation and follow-up of FLS-PC coordination in clinical practice in Spain. PURPOSE: To develop a BPF for the coordination of FLS with PC in Spain and to improve the continuity of care for patients with fragility fractures. METHODS: A Steering Committee selected experts from seven Spanish FLS and related PC doctors and nurses to participate in a best practice workshop. Selection criteria were an active FLS with an identified champion and prior contact with PC centres linked to the hospital. The main aim of the workshop was to review current FLS practices in Spain and their integration with PC. A BPF document with processes, tools, roles, and metrics was then generated. RESULTS: Spanish FLS consists of a multidisciplinary team of physicians/nurses but with low participation of other professionals and PC staff. Evaluation and treatment strategies are widely variable. Four desired standards were agreed upon: (1) Effective channels for FLS-PC communication; (2) minimum contents of an FLS clinical report and its delivery to PC; (3) adherence monitoring 3 months after FLS baseline visit; and (4) follow-up by PC. Proposed key performance indicators are (a) number of FLS-PC communications, including consensus protocols; (b) confirmation FLS report received by PC; (c) medical/nursing PC appointment after FLS report received; and (d) number of training sessions in PC. CONCLUSIONS: The BPF provides a comprehensive approach for FLS-PC coordination in Spain, to promote the continuity of care in patients with fragility fractures and improve secondary prevention. The implementation of BPF recommendations and performance indicator tracking will benchmark best FLS practices in the future.

Secular trends in the initiation of therapy in secondary fracture prevention in Europe: a multi-national cohort study including data from Denmark, Catalonia, and the United Kingdom.

This paper demonstrates a large post-fracture anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in the period 2005 to 2015. The gap was stable in Denmark at around 88-90%, increased in Catalonia from 80 to 88%, and started to increase in the UK towards the end of our study. Improved post-fracture care is needed. INTRODUCTION: Patients experiencing a fragility fracture are at high risk of subsequent fractures, particularly within the first 2 years after the fracture. Previous studies have demonstrated that only a small proportion of fracture patients initiate therapy with an anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM), despite the proven fracture risk reduction of such therapies. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in this post-fracture treatment gap across three different countries from 2005 to 2015. METHODS: This analysis, which is part of a multinational cohort study, included men and women, aged 50 years or older, sustaining a first incident fragility fracture. Using routinely collected patient data from three administrative health databases covering Catalonia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, we estimated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients not treated with AOM within 1 year of their first incident fracture. RESULTS: A total of 648,369 fracture patients were included. Mean age 70.2-78.9 years; 22.2-31.7% were men. In Denmark, the treatment gap was stable at approximately 88-90% throughout the 2005 to 2015 time period. In Catalonia, the treatment gap increased from 80 to 88%. In the UK, an initially decreasing treatment gap-though never smaller than 63%-was replaced by an increasing gap towards the end of our study. The gap was more pronounced in men than in women. CONCLUSION: Despite repeated calls for improved secondary fracture prevention, an unacceptably large treatment gap remains, with time trends indicating that the problem may be getting worse in recent years.

Correction to: Algorithm for the management of patients at low, high and very high risk of osteoporotic fractures.

The article 'Algorithm for the management of patients at low, high and very high risk of osteoporotic fractures',written by J. A. Kanis, was originally published Online First without Open Access. After publication in volume [#], issue [#] and page [#-#], the author decided to opt for Open Choice and to make the article an Open Access publication.

Correction to: Impact of risk minimisation measures on the use of strontium ranelate in Europe: a multi-national cohort study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance.

The original version of this article, published on 26 November 2019 contained a mistake.

Inappropriate opioid dispensing in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate inappropriate opioid dispensing in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) defined as (1) dispensing of opioids within the first year of diagnosis or (2) long-term opioid use. DESIGN: Data from Skåne Healthcare Register was linked with the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. Incidence proportion of dispensed opioids within first year of incident knee or hip OA diagnosis was determined in knee (n = 399,670) and hip (413,216) OA cohorts without a history of OA. The 1-year period prevalence of long-term opioid dispensing was determined in a prevalence cohort (n = 48,574 with knee and/or hip OA and n = 457,587 without OA). The proportion of OA patients with excess opioid dispensing attributable to OA was estimated using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment. RESULTS: In the incident cohorts, 5866 and 2359 developed knee and hip OA, respectively. Within the first year after OA diagnosis 14.7% patients with knee OA and 20.7% with hip OA had an opioid dispensed. The estimated inappropriate dispensing attributable to OA was 7.4% (95% CI 6.5-8.4) for knee OA and 12.8% (95% CI 11.1-14.4) for hip OA. Among persons with prevalent knee, hip or knee and hip OA inappropriate, long-term opioid use attributable to OA was 1.3%, 2.0% and 2.4% of, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: More than half the incident opioid dispensations to patients within their first year after knee or hip OA diagnosis are inappropriate according to current treatment guidelines. Furthermore, 2% of patients with prevalent knee or hip OA have inappropriate long-term dispensing of opioids.

Algorithm for the management of patients at low, high and very high risk of osteoporotic fractures.

Guidance is provided in an international setting on the assessment and specific treatment of postmenopausal women at low, high and very high risk of fragility fractures. INTRODUCTION: The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2019. This manuscript seeks to apply this in an international setting, taking additional account of further categorisation of increased risk of fracture, which may inform choice of therapeutic approach. METHODS: Clinical perspective and updated literature search. RESULTS: The following areas are reviewed: categorisation of fracture risk and general pharmacological management of osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use to characterise fracture risk and direct interventions.