Surgical treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis: short-term outcomes of 42 patients.

PURPOSE: The present retrospective study aimed to analyze patient characteristics, perioperative complications, and short-term outcomes of surgery for fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP). METHODS: We selected 42 patients who underwent surgery for FFP between October 2019 and October 2022 and could be followed for more than 6 months postoperatively, including one male patient and 41 female patients with an average age of 83.5 (65-96) years. The following demographic data were collected: Rommens classification, surgical method, reoperation rate, implant loosening, perioperative complications, interventional radiology (IVR) indication rate, perioperative blood transfusion indication rate, Parker Mobility Score (PMS) before surgery and at final follow-up, and numerical rating scale (NRS) score before surgery and on day 3 postoperatively. RESULTS: Rommens classification was as follows: type IIa (n = 2), type IIb (n = 13), type IIIa (n = 8), type IIIc (n = 3), type IVb (n = 13), and type IVc (n = 3). For surgical procedure, 35 patients (83.3%) were successfully stabilized with percutaneous screw fixation alone, and 7 patients further required open plate fixation. Implant loosening was observed in 16 patients (38.1%), including minor cases, and implant removal was required in 1 patient. Minor perforation of the screw was observed as an intraoperative complication in 6 patients; there were no patients with neurological symptoms. At the time of injury, IVR was indicated in 3 patients (7.1%) because of hemorrhage. Thirty patients (71.4%) had medical complications at the time of admission. One patient died due to postoperative pneumonia. Mean PMS before injury and at final follow-up were 6.51 points and 5.38 points, respectively. Mean NRS scores before surgery and on day 3 postoperatively were 5.26 and 3.49, respectively, showing a significant improvement (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who required surgery for FFP. More than 80% of cases could be treated with percutaneous screw fixation, but it is always important to consider hemorrhagic shock at the time of injury and indications for IVR. Implant loosening was observed in 38.1% of patients, including minor cases, and was considered an issue to be improved on in the future, such as by using cement augmentation. A significant improvement in mean NRS score on day 3 postoperatively relative to the mean preoperative score was observed, suggesting that surgery may contribute to early mobilization.

Real World Clinical Outcomes When Discontinuing Denosumab or Bisphosphonates in Patients with Surgically Managed Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are common fragility fractures. Patients who undergo surgical treatment for their initial OVCFs warrant particular attention because there is an elevated risk of subsequent vertebral fractures and other types of fragility fractures. However, the optimal osteoporosis treatment for this specific patient group is less investigated. PURPOSE: This study compares the risk of subsequent osteoporotic fractures and mortality rate for patients who are initiated with denosumab and bisphosphonates and determines the effect of adherence to treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective nationwide cohort study PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 2,858 patients who had surgically-managed osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. OUTCOME MEASURES: The risk of osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, non-vertebral fractures and death. METHODS: This is a retrospective nationwide cohort study that uses the National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients aged ≥50 years who were admitted for surgical interventions for OVCF between 2012 and 2016 and subsequently received denosumab or bisphosphonates for one year were included. Patients were stratified according to their anti-osteoporosis medications and adherence to treatment. A multivariable, time-varying Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the risk of osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, non-vertebral fractures and death. RESULTS: A total of 2,858 patients were included in this study: 1,123 patients in the denosumab group and 1,735 patients in the bisphosphonates group. Compared to persistent denosumab users, the non-persistent denosumab users, persistent bisphosphonate users and non-persistent bisphosphonate users had a greater risk of osteoporotic fractures, with respective hazard ratios of 1.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.32), 1.74 (95% CI, 1.25-2.42) and 1.53 (95% CI, 1.14-2.06). If osteoporotic fractures were divided into non-vertebral and vertebral fractures, none of the groups exhibited an increased risk of vertebral fractures compared to persistent denosumab users, with an HR of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.54-1.88) for non-persistent denosumab users, 1.64 (95% CI: 0.96-2.81) for persistent bisphosphonate users and 1.52 (95% CI: 0.95-2.43) for non-persistent bisphosphonate users. However, there was a significantly greater risk of non-vertebral fracture, with respective hazard ratios of 2.04 (95% CI, 1.33-3.11), 1.80 (95% CI, 1.18-2.76) and 1.56 (95% CI, 1.06-2.27) for non-persistent denosumab users, persistent bisphosphonate users and non-persistent users. Noteworthy, non-persistent denosumab users exhibited a significantly greater risk of mortality than persistent denosumab users, with a hazard ratio of 3.12 (95% CI, 2.22-4.38). CONCLUSIONS: In terms of patients with OVCFs who require hospitalization and surgical intervention, those who receive ongoing denosumab treatment exhibit less risk of developing subsequent osteoporotic fractures than those who receive bisphosphonates or non-persistent denosumab treatment. However, discontinuation of denosumab is associated with a significantly increased risk of subsequent fractures and mortality. Therefore, adherence to the treatment is crucial for patients who are initiated with denosumab.

Opportunistic CT screening demonstrates increased risk for peri-articular fractures in osteoporotic patients.

BACKGROUND: Underdiagnosis or undertreatment of osteoporosis consequently impacts individual morbidity and mortality, as well as on healthcare systems and communities as a whole. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard method for identifying osteoporosis, however, opportunistic CT screening is capable of precisely estimating bone mineral density (BMD) in abdominopelvic imaging with no additional cost, radiation exposure or inconvenience to patients. This study uses opportunistic CT screening to determine the prevalence of osteoporosis and anatomic distribution patterns in patients presenting with lower extremity fractures at our institution. HYPOTHESIS: Trauma patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) are more likely to present with peri-articular versus shaft fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 721 patients presenting as trauma activations to the emergency department (ED) of a Level 1 Trauma Center with lower extremity fractures. Patients were excluded if under the age of 18 or lacking a CT scan upon arrival in the ED. Hounsfield Units (HU) were measured at the L1 vertebral level on CT scans to determine bone mineral density. Values of ≤100 HU were consistent with osteoporosis, whereas 101-150 HU were consistent with osteopenia. RESULTS: The final cohort included 416 patients, with mean age of 49 ± 21 years. Average bone density was 203.9 ± 73.4 HU. 15.9% of patients were diagnosed as osteopenic and 9.9% as osteoporotic. 64.2% of fractures were peri-articular, 25.7% were shaft, and 10.1% were a combination. Peri-articular fractures were significantly more likely to have lower average BMD than shaft fractures (189 ± 74.7 HU vs. 230.6 ± 66.1 HU, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates a significant relationship between low bone mineral density and lower extremity fracture pattern, however, likely influenced by other factors such as sex. Opportunistic CT screening for osteoporosis in trauma settings provides ample opportunity for early detection of low BMD and implementation of highly effective lifestyle modification and pharmacotherapy intervention. Reduction in the overall incidence of peri-articular fracture with widespread adoption of opportunistic CT screening may lessen the morbidity, mortality, and total cost currently afflicting patients, healthcare systems, and communities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, therapeutic.

Implementation of a Fracture Liaison Service in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia: a feasibility study.

Fracture Liaison Service is a coordinator-based model effective in addressing the fragility fracture care gap. This study found that the service was feasible in Malaysia and could improve the delivery of secondary fracture prevention. Local adaptations and reactive responses addressed challenges, enhancing feasibility. PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of a Fracture Liaison Service in Malaysia and to benchmark our service against the International Osteoporosis Foundation Best Practice Framework. METHODS: This feasibility study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Malaysia from March 2021 to March 2022. Patients aged ≥ 50 years admitted with fragility fractures were recruited. Excluded were those with poor prognosis or transferred out from the hospital during admission. Patients were screened, assessed, and followed up at months 4 and 12 post-fracture presentations. Data was collected using Microsoft Excel and the REDCap database. The feasibility of the Fracture Liaison Service was evaluated using the typology of feasibility. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients (female (93/140, 66.4%), median age 77 (IQR 72, 83), hip fractures (100/140, 65.8%)) were recruited into the Fracture Liaison Service. The recruitment rate was (140/215, 65.1%), as some patients were "missed" due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The completion rate was high (101/114, 88.6%). Among those indicated for antiosteoporosis medication, 82/100 (82%) were initiated on treatment. Various "Best Practice Standards," such as patient evaluation (140/140, 100%), fall prevention (130/140, 92.9%), and medication review standards (15/15, 100%) were high. Complicated referral pathways, inexperienced staff, lack of resources, and communication issues were some of the barriers identified while implementing the Fracture Liaison Service. Challenges were overcome by modifying the service workflow and coordinating with different departments. CONCLUSION: The Fracture Liaison Service was found to be feasible in Malaysia. It demonstrated promise in improving bone health management; however, several changes were needed to adapt the service to suit our environment.

Recommendations for the optimal use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis.

Bone forming agents, also known as anabolic therapies, are essential in managing osteoporosis, particularly for patients at very high-risk of fractures. Identifying candidates who will benefit the most from these treatments is crucial. For example, this group might include individuals with severe osteoporosis, multiple vertebral fractures, a recent fragility fracture or those unresponsive to antiresorptive treatments. Definitions of patients with a very high fracture risk vary across nations, are often based on fracture history, bone mineral density (BMD), and/or fracture risk calculated by FRAX® or other algorithms. However, for very high-risk patients, anabolic agents such as teriparatide, abaloparatide, or romosozumab are commonly recommended as first-line therapies due to their ability to stimulate new bone formation and improve bone microarchitecture, offering significant benefits in rapid fracture reduction over antiresorptive therapies. The cost-effectiveness of these agents is a critical consideration for decision-makers. Despite their higher costs, their effectiveness in significantly reducing fracture risk and improving quality of life can justify the investment, especially when long-term savings from reduced fracture rates and associated healthcare costs are considered. Additionally, after completing a course of anabolic therapy, transitioning to antiresorptive agents like bisphosphonates or denosumab is crucial to maintain the gains in bone density and minimize subsequent fracture risks. This sequential treatment approach ensures sustained protection and optimal resource utilization. In summary, the effective use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis requires a comprehensive strategy that includes accurate patient identification, consideration of cost-effectiveness, and implementation of appropriate sequential treatments, ultimately maximizing patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Outcomes After Implementation of a Fragility Fracture Pathway in Ground Level Falls.

INTRODUCTION: Fragility fractures occur due to low energy mechanisms and result in significant morbidity and mortality. This study reviews the implementation of a fragility fracture program at a level I trauma center. In this pathway, trauma surgery provides clearance followed by admission and management with medical service and orthopedic consultation for injuries which meet fragility fracture criteria. METHODS: This pathway, implemented in July 2021, includes patients with isolated fractures secondary to a low energy mechanism. We compared cohorts 2-ys before (PRE) and after (POS) pathway implementation. Demographics (age, sex, fracture location, injury severity score, American Society of Anesthesiologists score) and outcome data were collected and analyzed using between-subjects analyses. Measured outcomes included deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, hospital mortality, disposition to hospice, nonoperative rate, unplanned intensive care unit admission, time to surgery (TTS), and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: The study included n = 1137 patients (n = 564 PRE and n = 573 POS). POS patients had a higher injury severity score (P = 0.003) and different fracture location (P = 0.017), but no other demographics were different. Trauma admission decreased after implementation (P < 0.001; PRE: 21.5%, POS: 1.8%) with no differences in outcomes except increases in LOS (P < 0.001; PRE: 114 h, POS: 124 h) and TTS (P < 0.001; PRE: 15 h, POS: 18 h). CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity and mortality did not correlate with pathway implementation; however, TTS and LOS increased. Although TTS increased, it remained under the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgery 48-h recommendation. The TTS and LOS increases were potentially from COVID-19 or cohort demographic differences. Decreased trauma as admitting service demonstrates pathway adherence. These findings highlight the need for investigation to better understand fragility fracture pathways.

Fracture liaison service-a multidisciplinary approach to osteoporosis management.

A fracture liaison service is a systems-level multidisciplinary approach designed to reduce subsequent fracture risk in patients who recently sustained fragility fractures. It is estimated that one in three women and one in five men over the age of 50 years old have osteoporosis. Nonetheless, only 9 to 20% of patients who sustain an initial fragility fracture eventually receive any osteoporosis treatment. With the aim of preventing subsequent fractures, a fracture liaison service (FLS) works through identifying patients presenting with fragility fractures to the hospital and providing them with easier access to osteoporosis care through referrals for bone health and fracture risk assessment and recommendation or initiation of osteoporosis treatment. Currently, there are four major types of FLS models ranging from services that only identify at-risk patients and inform and educate the patient but take no further part in communicating their findings to other stakeholders in patients' care, to services that identify, investigate, and initiate treatment at the other end of the spectrum. In this article, we review the benefits, challenges, and outcomes of FLS in the American healthcare system with further exploration of the roles each member of the multidisciplinary team can play in improving patients' bone health.

Following hip fracture, hospital organizational factors associated with prescription of anti-osteoporosis medication on discharge, to address imminent refracture risk: a record-linkage study.

Patients who sustain a hip fracture are known to be at imminent refracture risk. Their complex multidisciplinary rehabilitation needs to include falls prevention and anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) to prevent such fractures. This study aimed to determine which hospital-level organizational factors predict prescription of post-hip fracture AOM and refracture risk. A cohort of 178 757 patients aged ≥60 yr who sustained a hip fracture in England and Wales (2016-2019) was examined and followed for 1 yr. Patient-level hospital admission datasets from 172 hospitals, the National Hip Fracture Database, and mortality data were linked to 71 metrics extracted from 18 hospital-level organizational reports. Multilevel models determined organizational factors, independent of patient case-mix, associated with (1) AOM prescription and (2) refracture (by ICD10 coding). Patients were mean (SD) 82.7 (8.6) yr old, 71% female, with 18% admitted from care homes. Overall, 101 735 (57%) were prescribed AOM during admission, while 50 354 (28%) died during 1-yr follow-up, 12 240 (7%) refractured. Twelve organizational factors were associated with AOM prescription, for example, orthogeriatrician-led care compared to traditional care models (odds ratio [OR] 4.65 [95% CI, 2.25-9.59]); AOM was 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%) more likely to be prescribed in hospitals providing routine bone health assessment to all patients. Refracture occurred at median 126 d (IQR 59-234). Eight organizational factors were associated with refracture risk; hospitals providing orthogeriatrician assessment to all patients within 72 h of admission had an 18% (95% CI, 2%-31%) lower refracture risk, weekend physiotherapy provision had an 8% (95% CI, 3%-14%) lower risk, and where occupational therapists attended clinical governance meetings, a 7% (95% CI, 2%-12%) lower risk. Delays initiating post-discharge community rehabilitation were associated with a 15% (95% CI, 3%-29%) greater refracture risk. These novel, national findings highlight the importance of orthogeriatrician, physiotherapist, and occupational therapist involvement in secondary fracture prevention post hip fracture; notably, fracture risk reductions were seen within 12 mo of hip fracture.

Patients who have broken (fractured) a hip are at risk of having another fracture soon after. They have complex needs to avoid more fractures, which include being prescribed bone-strengthening medicines and taking measures to prevent falls. This study looked at which of the measurements, that describe how well a hospital is organized, are associated with whether bone-strengthening medicine is prescribed and the chance of having another fracture. We used data from 178 757 patients aged over 60 yr who had a hip fracture at 172 English and Welsh hospitals, linked to their hospital records, and other datasets that describe hospital services. Overall, 57% of patients were prescribed bone-strengthening medicines, and 7% went on to have another fracture. Bone-strengthening medicines were more likely to be prescribed in hospitals where patient care was led by a consultant specializing in the care of older people with fractures (called orthogeriatricians) and in hospitals which routinely checked patients' bone health. Patients attending hospitals that provided orthogeriatrician assessment to all patients within 72 h of being admitted, physiotherapy services at the weekend, or where occupational therapists attended meetings aimed at improving hospital services had a lower chance of having another fracture.

A Comparison of Complication Rates between Early and Delayed Surgery among Filipino Patients with Fragility Fractures of the Hip.

Objectives: Existing standards of care recommend operative management for fragility fractures of the hip. Early intervention has been associated with lower incidence of morbidity and mortality. A lack of consensus remains in the Philippines however, regarding timing of surgery. We sought to determine the effects of surgical timing on in-hospital complications among Filipino patients with fragility hip fractures. Methods: All patients admitted for fragility hip fractures in a single tertiary-care facility from 2014-2016 were analyzed retrospectively. Subjects treated within 72 hours were grouped under "early intervention," while those managed beyond were designated "delayed intervention." Primary outcomes were complications during admission, while secondary outcome was length of hospital stay. A total of 96 patients met our inclusion criteria, of which 41 (42.71%) underwent early intervention. Baseline characteristics for both groups were comparable. Results: A significantly lower incidence of pressure ulcers (2.4% for ≤72hours vs 45.5%; p=<0.0001), pneumonia (7.32% vs 47.27%; p=<0.0001), and urinary tract infection (4.88% vs 40%; p=<0.0001), as well as shorter hospital stay (mean: 8.85 days±5.4 vs 14.6 days±13.3; p=0.01) were seen in the early intervention group. More cases of documented deep vein thrombosis were recorded in the delayed intervention group (83.3% versus 16.6%), as was the only case of in-hospital mortality. Conclusion: Early intervention showed a significantly lower incidence of in-hospital complications among patients with fragility fractures of the hip, suggesting that surgery within 72 hours may lead to better outcomes by helping to reduce the incidence of pressure sores, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection among Filipinos with hip fractures, while reducing length of admission.

Evaluation of fragility fracture risk using deep learning based on ultrasound radio frequency signal.

BACKGROUND: It was essential to identify individuals at high risk of fragility fracture and prevented them due to the significant morbidity, mortality, and economic burden associated with fragility fracture. The quantitative ultrasound (QUS) showed promise in assessing bone structure characteristics and determining the risk of fragility fracture. AIMS: To evaluate the performance of a multi-channel residual network (MResNet) based on ultrasonic radiofrequency (RF) signal to discriminate fragility fractures retrospectively in postmenopausal women, and compared it with the traditional parameter of QUS, speed of sound (SOS), and bone mineral density (BMD) acquired with dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). METHODS: Using QUS, RF signal and SOS were acquired for 246 postmenopausal women. An MResNet was utilized, based on the RF signal, to categorize individuals with an elevated risk of fragility fracture. DXA was employed to obtain BMD at the lumbar, hip, and femoral neck. The fracture history of all adult subjects was gathered. Analyzing the odds ratios (OR) and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) was done to evaluate the effectiveness of various methods in discriminating fragility fracture. RESULTS: Among the 246 postmenopausal women, 170 belonged to the non-fracture group, 50 to the vertebral group, and 26 to the non-vertebral fracture group. MResNet was competent to discriminate any fragility fracture (OR = 2.64; AUC = 0.74), Vertebral fracture (OR = 3.02; AUC = 0.77), and non-vertebral fracture (OR = 2.01; AUC = 0.69). After being modified by clinical covariates, the efficiency of MResNet was further improved to OR = 3.31-4.08, AUC = 0.81-0.83 among all fracture groups, which significantly surpassed QUS-SOS (OR = 1.32-1.36; AUC = 0.60) and DXA-BMD (OR = 1.23-2.94; AUC = 0.63-0.76). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot cross-sectional study demonstrates that the MResNet model based on the ultrasonic RF signal shows promising performance in discriminating fragility fractures in postmenopausal women. When incorporating clinical covariates, the efficiency of the modified MResNet is further enhanced, surpassing the performance of QUS-SOS and DXA-BMD in terms of OR and AUC. These findings highlight the potential of the MResNet as a promising approach for fracture risk assessment. Future research should focus on larger and more diverse populations to validate these results and explore its clinical applications.

Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping review.

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.

Equivalence in osteoporosis workup and management after femoral neck fracture fixation and vertebral compression fracture cement augmentation: A single-center retrospective study highlighting persistent Underdiagnosis and Undertreatment.

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre- and post-fracture medical management of osteoporosis among patients who underwent surgical fixation of femoral neck fractures (FNF) and vertebral compression fractures (VCF), and to investigate if there is a difference in treatment, management, and subsequent fractures between FNF and VCF patients. Methods: Patients who underwent surgical fixation of FNF or VCF were retrospectively reviewed at a minimum 1 year follow up. Patients were excluded if their fracture was caused by high energy trauma or malignancy, <50 years-old, deceased, or lost to follow up. Patient demographics such as age, sex, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiology Physical Status Classification System and Charleston Comorbidity index were recorded. Management of osteoporosis, including medication regimen and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans were assessed preoperatively and at minimum one year follow up. Subsequent fractures were also recorded. Results: In the analysis of 370 patients (74.7% FNF, 25.2% VCF), demographics showed a predominantly female population (mean age 78.1). Preoperatively, 21.6% were diagnosed with osteoporosis, consistent between FNF and VCF. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences in new osteoporosis diagnoses, bisphosphonate use, or subsequent fractures. VCF patients, however, were more likely to receive denosumab and post-operative DEXA scans (p < 0.05). Within a year, 6.2% experienced subsequent fractures, with no significant FNF-VCF difference. Only 12.7% received appropriate post-operative osteoporosis treatment, 27.1% had DEXA scans, and 25% had a recorded osteoporosis diagnosis. Multivariable analysis highlighted pre-fracture osteoporosis diagnosis as the sole predictor for post-operative DEXA scans and anti-osteoporotic medication (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study suggests that factors beyond the type of fragility fracture may influence subsequent fracture risk and anti-osteoporotic medication administration in elderly patients. These findings underscore the importance of a comprehensive approach to fracture risk assessment and treatment decisions in this population. Level of evidence: III.

When is a fracture not just a fracture? Exploring emergency nurses' knowledge of osteoporosis in the West of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are set to rise with the global ageing population. Prevalence will continue to significantly impact people's quality of life and healthcare expenditure. Emergency nurses are ideally placed to highlight the importance of screening, and treatment, to the public. For emergency nurses to impart information to patients it is essential they have accurate, evidence-based knowledge. This study aims to determine if emergency nurses' knowledge of osteoporosis is sufficient to educate the public. METHOD: A cross sectional descriptive design of 210 emergency nurses using the 'Osteoporosis Knowledge Questionnaire' (OKQ) was administered in four hospitals in the West of Ireland. Data was analysed using SPSS v28. RESULTS: A 66 % response rate was achieved. The mean score on the OKQ was 12.13 out of a possible 22. This suggests emergency nurses' knowledge of osteoporosis is substandard. Level of education has the greatest impact on participants (p = 0.005). Results indicated that emergency nurses acknowledge their responsibility regarding health promotion but lack the knowledge to undertake the role. CONCLUSION: Emergency nurses play a pivotal role in reducing osteoporosis and fragility fractures, by disseminating information to patients on prevention and management. This study highlighted that educational initiatives are required to address the deficiencies amongst emergency nurses' understanding of osteoporosis. Enhancing knowledge will inevitably lead to increased public awareness in tackling this global health crisis.

Nutrition, Vitamin D, and Calcium in Elderly Patients before and after a Hip Fracture and Their Impact on the Musculoskeletal System: A Narrative Review.

Hip fractures are a major health issue considerably impacting patients' quality of life and well-being. This is particularly evident in elderly subjects, in which the decline in bone and muscle mass coexists and predisposes individuals to fall and fracture. Among interventions to be implemented in hip fractured patients, the assessment and management of nutritional status is pivotal, particularly in subjects older than 65. Nutrition plays a central role in both primary and secondary preventions of fracture. An adequate protein intake improves muscle mass and strength and the intestinal absorption of calcium. Other nutrients with recognized beneficial effects on bone health are calcium, vitamins D, K, and C, potassium, magnesium, folate, and carotenoids. With reference to calcium, results from longitudinal studies showed that the consumption of dairy foods has a protective role against fractures. Moreover, the most recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses and one umbrella review demonstrated that the combination of calcium and vitamin D supplementation significantly reduces hip fracture risk, with presumed higher efficacy in older and institutionalized subjects. Owing to these reasons, the adequate intake of calcium, vitamin D, protein, and other macro and micronutrients has been successfully implemented in the Fracture Liaison Services (FLSs) that represent the most reliable model of management for hip fracture patients. In this narrative review, papers (randomized controlled trials, prospective and intervention studies, and systematic reviews) retrieved by records from three different databases (PubMed, Embase, and Medline) have been analyzed, and the available information on the screening, assessment, and management of nutritional and vitamin D status and calcium intake in patients with hip fractures is presented along with specific prevention and treatment measures.

Hip fracture rate and osteoporosis treatment in Ontario: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

This population-based study analyzes hip fracture and osteoporosis treatment rates among older adults, stratified by place of residence prior to fracture. Hip fracture rates were higher among older adults living in the community and discharged to long-term care (LTC) after fracture, compared to LTC residents and older adults living in the community. Only 23% of LTC residents at high fracture risk received osteoporosis treatment. PURPOSE: This population-based study examines hip fracture rate and osteoporosis management among long-term care (LTC) residents > 65 years of age compared to community-dwelling older adults at the time of fracture and admitted to LTC after fracture, in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Healthcare utilization and administrative databases were linked using unique, encoded identifiers from the ICES Data Repository to estimate hip fractures (identified using the Public Health Agency of Canada algorithm and International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes) and osteoporosis management (pharmacotherapy) among adults > 66 years from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2018. Sex-specific and age-standardized rates were compared by pre-fracture residency and discharge location (i.e., LTC to LTC, community to LTC, or community to community). Fracture risk was determined using the Fracture Risk Scale (FRS). RESULTS: At baseline (2014/15), the overall age-standardized hip fracture rate among LTC residents was 223 per 10,000 person-years (173 per 10,000 females and 157 per 10,000 males), 509 per 10,000 person-years (468 per 10,000 females and 320 per 10,000 males) among the community to LTC cohort, and 31.5 per 10,000 person-years (43.1 per 10,000 females and 25.6 per 10,000 males). During the 5-year observation period, the overall annual average percent change (APC) for hip fracture increased significantly in LTC (AAPC = + 8.6 (95% CI 5.0 to 12.3; p = 0.004) compared to the community to LTC group (AAPC = + 2.5 (95% CI - 3.0 to 8.2; p = 0.248)) and the community-to-community cohort (AAPC - 3.8 (95% CI - 6.7 to - 0.7; p = 030)). However, hip fracture rate remained higher in the community to LTC group over the study period. There were 33,594 LTC residents identified as high risk of fracture (FRS score 4 +), of which 7777 were on treatment (23.3%). CONCLUSION: Overall, hip fracture rates have increased in LTC and among community-dwelling adults admitted to LTC after fracture. However, hip fracture rates among community-dwelling adults have decreased over time. A non-significant increase in osteoporosis treatment rates was observed among LTC residents at high risk of fracture (FRS4 +). Residents in LTC are at very high risk for fracture and require individualized based on goals of care and life expectancy.

A comparison of foot fractures relative to other fragility fractures: a review and analysis of the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone Database.

Evidence regarding the risk factors and characteristics of those with foot fragility fractures compared to non-foot fragility fractures is limited. Foot fragility fracture patients are more likely to be younger female with a higher BMI. A foot fragility fracture is strongly predictive of a subsequent foot fragility fracture. PURPOSE: Osteoporosis can clinically result in fragility fractures. Evidence regarding the risk factors and characteristics of foot fragility fractures compared to non-foot fragility fractures is limited. The American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone (OTB) is a bone health initiative with a substantial dataset. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare characteristics of patients presenting with isolated foot fragility fracture to those with a non-foot fragility fracture. METHODS: Between January 2009 and March of 2022, 58,001 fragility fractures occurred that were included in this cohort. A total of 750 patients had foot fragility fracture(s) and 57,251 patients had a non-foot fragility fracture that included shoulder, arm, elbow, forearm, wrist, spine, ribs, pelvis, hip, thigh, knee, tibia/fibula, and ankle. Demographics, fracture history, bone health factors, medication history, and medication use for each patient were reported in the OTB database. This data was utilized in our secondary cohort comparative analysis of characteristics and the risk of future fractures between foot fragility fracture and non-foot fragility fracture groups. RESULTS: Foot fragility fracture patients have a significantly higher probability to be younger (66.9 years old), female (91.5%), and have a higher BMI (28.3 kg/m2) compared to non-foot fragility fracture (p < 0.0001) patients. Patients with a foot fragility fracture are nine times (OR = 9.119, CI = 7.44-11.18, p < 0.001) more likely to have had a prior foot fragility fracture. Young, female patients with a prior foot fragility fracture are at higher risk of a future foot fragility fracture, and this risk increased as BMI increased. CONCLUSIONS: Foot fragility fracture patients are more likely to be female and younger compared to patients with a non-foot fragility fracture. A foot fragility fracture is a sentinel event considering that a prior foot fragility fracture is strongly predictive of a subsequent foot fragility fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 (retrospective cohort).

Prior fragility fractures are associated with a higher risk of 8-year complications following total shoulder arthroplasty.

Patients who sustain fragility fractures prior to total shoulder arthroplasty have significantly higher risk for bone health-related complications within 8 years of procedure. Identification of these high-risk patients with an emphasis on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative bone health optimization may help minimize these preventable complications. PURPOSE: As the population ages, more patients with osteoporosis are undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), including those who have sustained a prior fragility fracture. Sustaining a fragility fracture before TSA has been associated with increased risk of short-term revision rates, periprosthetic fracture (PPF), and secondary fragility fractures but long-term implant survivorship in this patient population is unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize the association of prior fragility fractures with 8-year risks of revision TSA, periprosthetic fracture, and secondary fragility fracture. METHODS: Patients aged 50 years and older who underwent TSA were identified in a large national database. Patients were stratified based on whether they sustained a fragility fracture within 3 years prior to TSA. Patients who had a prior fragility fracture (7631) were matched 1:1 to patients who did not based on age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), smoking, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and alcohol use. Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards analyses were used to observe the cumulative incidences of all-cause revision, periprosthetic fracture, and secondary fragility fracture within 8 years of index surgery. RESULTS: The 8-year cumulative incidence of revision TSA (5.7% vs. 4.1%), periprosthetic fracture (3.8% vs. 1.4%), and secondary fragility fracture (46.5% vs. 10.1%) were significantly higher for those who had a prior fragility fracture when compared to those who did not. On multivariable analysis, a prior fragility fracture was associated with higher risks of revision (hazard ratio [HR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-1.74; p < 0.001), periprosthetic fracture (HR, 2.98; 95% CI, 2.18-4.07; p < 0.001) and secondary fragility fracture (HR, 8.39; 95% CI, 7.62-9.24; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prior fragility fracture was a significant risk factor for revision, periprosthetic fracture, and secondary fragility fracture within 8 years of primary TSA. Identification of these high-risk patients with an emphasis on preoperative and postoperative bone health optimization may help minimize these complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Undiagnosed vertebral fragility fractures in patients with distal radius fragility fractures: an opportunity for prevention of morbimortality in osteoporotic patients in developing countries.

Our study investigates vertebral fractures in individuals with distal radius fractures. Among 512 patients, 41.21% had vertebral fractures, predominantly in the lumbar spine. These findings highlight the importance of screening for vertebral fractures in this population, informing early intervention strategies to mitigate risks associated with osteoporosis. PURPOSE: This study's main goal was to look into the frequency, location, kind, and severity of asymptomatic vertebral fragility fractures (VFF) in people who had fractures of the fragility of the distal radius. Although VFF is frequently misdiagnosed, it is linked to higher mortality, morbidity, and hip fracture risk. The study also attempted to investigate the relationship between VFF and certain demographic and lifestyle factors, as well as FRAX data, in this patient population. METHODS: Between January, 2021, and January, 2022, individuals with low-energy distal radial fractures who presented to the emergency room of tertiary care hospital of Karachi, Pakistan, were the subject of a cross-sectional study and were 45 years of age or older except those who fitted the exclusion criteria (n = 208). The thoracic and/or lumbar spine was imaged using radiology, and information on demographics, way of life, and FRAX (Fracture Risk Assessment Tool) was gathered. Using the Genant semiquantitative approach, an impartial and blinded orthopaedist identified VF in the images and determined their severity. SPSS version 20 was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven (41.21%) of them were found to have radiographic VFF and only 12 (2.34%) of the 512 patients who were tested were getting osteoporotic therapy. The thoracic spine (32.7%), followed by the lumbar spine (43.12%), was the area most frequently afflicted. In 24.17% of the patients, multiple fractures of the thoracolumbar spine were found. The wedge form (54.5%), followed by biconcave (30.81%) and crush (14.7%), was the most prevalent VFF type. The majority of detected VFF were rated as having a 25-40% height loss (64.9%) then severe (> 40%) fractures (35.1%), according to the Genant grading method. Notably, there were no variations in smoking, drinking, BMI, or FRAX score between patients with and without VFF that were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Based on our study's findings, it is clear that osteoporotic vertebral fragility fractures occur in almost half of individuals with distal radius fractures. The lumbar spine is notably the most affected region, predominantly with wedge fractures. Given the high prevalence of asymptomatic vertebral fragility fractures (VFF), proactive measures are necessary to mitigate associated risks. Prioritising comprehensive fall risk assessments for these patients and interventions to enhance bone mineral density and strength are crucial. Early identification of asymptomatic VFF enables timely intervention, optimising patient care and minimising the risk of complications in this vulnerable population.

Prediction of subsequent fragility fractures: application of machine learning.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) has shown exceptional promise in various domains of medical research. However, its application in predicting subsequent fragility fractures is still largely unknown. In this study, we aim to evaluate the predictive power of different ML algorithms in this area and identify key features associated with the risk of subsequent fragility fractures in osteoporotic patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients presented with fragility fractures at our Fracture Liaison Service, categorizing them into index fragility fracture (n = 905) and subsequent fragility fracture groups (n = 195). We independently trained ML models using 27 features for both male and female cohorts. The algorithms tested include Random Forest, XGBoost, CatBoost, Logistic Regression, LightGBM, AdaBoost, Multi-Layer Perceptron, and Support Vector Machine. Model performance was evaluated through 10-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: The CatBoost model outperformed other models, achieving 87% accuracy and an AUC of 0.951 for females, and 93.4% accuracy with an AUC of 0.990 for males. The most significant predictors for females included age, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), 25(OH)D, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), parathyroid hormone (PTH), femoral neck Z-score, menopause age, number of pregnancies, phosphorus, calcium, and body mass index (BMI); for males, the predictors were serum CRP, femoral neck T-score, PTH, hip T-score, BMI, BUN, creatinine, alkaline phosphatase, and spinal Z-score. CONCLUSION: ML models, especially CatBoost, offer a valuable approach for predicting subsequent fragility fractures in osteoporotic patients. These models hold the potential to enhance clinical decision-making by supporting the development of personalized preventative strategies.