Adherence to osteoporosis therapy after an upper extremity fracture: a pre-specified substudy of the C-STOP randomized controlled trial.

Despite their proven efficacy for secondary fracture prevention, long-term adherence with oral bisphosphonates is poor. INTRODUCTION: To compare the effectiveness of two interventions on long-term oral bisphosphonate adherence after an upper extremity fragility fracture. METHODS: Community-dwelling participants 50 years or older with upper extremity fragility fractures not previously treated with bisphosphonates were randomized to either a multi-faceted patient and physician educational intervention (the active control arm) vs. a nurse-led case manager (the study arm). Primary outcome was adherence (taking > 80% of prescribed doses) with prescribed oral bisphosphonates at 12 months postfracture between groups; secondary outcomes included rates of primary non-adherence and 24-month adherence. We also compared quality of life between adherent and non-adherent patients. RESULTS: By 12 months, adherence with the initially prescribed bisphosphonate was similar (p = 0.96) in both groups: 38/48 (79.2%) in the educational intervention group vs. 66/83 (79.5%) in the case manager arm. By 24 months, adherence rates were 67% (32/48) in the educational intervention group vs. 53% (43/81) in case managed patients (p = 0.13). Primary non-adherence was 6% (11 patients) in the educational intervention group and 12% (21 patients) in the case managed group (p = 0.07). Prior family history of osteoporosis (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.4) and being satisfied with current medical care (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.8) were associated with better adherence while lower income (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6, for patients with income < $30,000 per annum) was associated with poorer rates of adherence. There were no differences in health-related quality of life scores at baseline or during follow-up between patients who were adherent and those who were not. CONCLUSION: While both interventions achieved higher oral bisphosphonate adherence compared to previously reported adherence rates in the general population, primary non-adherence and long-term adherence to bisphosphonates were similar in both arms. Adherence was influenced by family history of osteoporosis, satisfaction with current medical care, and income. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01401556.

Understanding fragility fracture patients' decision-making process regarding bisphosphonate treatment.

We aimed to understand how patients 50 years and older decided to persist with or stop osteoporosis (OP) treatment. Processes related to persisting with or stopping OP treatments are complex and dynamic. The severity and risks and harms related to untreated clinical OP and the favorable benefit-to-risk profile for OP treatments should be reinforced. INTRODUCTION: Older adults with fragility fracture and clinical OP are at high risk of recurrent fracture, and treatment reduces this risk by 50 %. However, only 20 % of fracture patients are treated for OP and half stop treatment within 1 year. We aimed to understand how older patients with new fractures decided to persist with or stop OP treatment over 1 year. METHODS: We conducted a grounded theory study of patients 50 years and older with upper extremity fracture who started bisphosphonates and then reported persisting with or stopping treatment at 1 year. We used theoretical sampling to identify patients who could inform emerging concepts until data saturation was achieved and analyzed these data using constant comparison. RESULTS: We conducted 21 interviews with 12 patients. Three major themes emerged. First, patients perceived OP was not a serious health condition and considered its impact negligible. Second, persisters and stoppers differed in weighting the risks vs benefits of treatments, where persisters perceived less risk and more benefit. Persisters considered treatment "required" while stoppers often deemed treatment "optional." Third, patients could change treatment status even 1-year post-fracture because they re-evaluated severity and impact of OP vs risks and benefits of treatments over time. CONCLUSIONS: The processes and reasoning related to persisting with or stopping OP treatments post-fracture are complex and dynamic. Our findings suggest two areas of leverage for healthcare providers to reinforce to improve persistence: (1) the severity and risks and harms related to untreated clinical OP and (2) the favorable benefit-to-risk profile for OP treatments.

Critical impact of patient knowledge and bone density testing on starting osteoporosis treatment after fragility fracture: secondary analyses from two controlled trials.

UNLABELLED: Most patients are not treated for osteoporosis after their fragility fracture "teachable moment." Among almost 400 consecutive wrist fracture patients, we determined that better-than-average osteoporosis knowledge (adjusted odds = 2.6) and BMD testing (adjusted odds = 6.5) were significant modifiable facilitators of bisphosphonate treatment while male sex, working outside the home, and depression were major barriers. INTRODUCTION: In the year following fragility fracture, fewer than one quarter of patients are treated for osteoporosis. Although much is known regarding health system and provider barriers and facilitators to osteoporosis treatment, much less is understood about modifiable patient-related factors. METHODS: Older patients with wrist fracture not treated for osteoporosis were enrolled in trials that compared a multifaceted intervention with usual care controls. Baseline data included a test of patient osteoporosis knowledge. We then determined baseline factors that independently predicted starting bisphosphonate treatment within 1 year. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-four patients were enrolled; mean age 64 years, 78 % women, 90 % white, and 54 % with prior fracture. Within 1 year, 86 of 374 (23 %) patients were treated with bisphosphonates. Patients who were treated had better osteoporosis knowledge at baseline (70 % correct vs 57 % for untreated, p < 0.001) than patients who remained untreated; conversely, untreated patients were more likely to be male, still working, and report depression. In fully adjusted models, osteoporosis knowledge was independently associated with starting bisphosphonates (adjusted OR 2.6, 95 %CI 1.3-5.3). Obtaining a BMD test (aOR 6.5, 95 %CI 3.4-12.2) and abnormal BMD results (aOR 34.5, 95 %CI 16.8-70.9) were strongly associated with starting treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The most important modifiable facilitators of osteoporosis treatment in patients with fracture were knowledge and BMD testing. Specifically targeting these two patient-level factors should improve post-fracture treatment rates.

Nurse case-manager vs multifaceted intervention to improve quality of osteoporosis care after wrist fracture: randomized controlled pilot study.

UNLABELLED: Few outpatients with fractures are treated for osteoporosis in the years following fracture. In a randomized pilot study, we found a nurse case-manager could double rates of osteoporosis testing and treatment compared with a proven efficacious quality improvement strategy directed at patients and physicians (57% vs 28% rates of appropriate care). INTRODUCTION: Few patients with fractures are treated for osteoporosis. An intervention directed at wrist fracture patients (education) and physicians (guidelines, reminders) tripled osteoporosis treatment rates compared to controls (22% vs 7% within 6 months of fracture). More effective strategies are needed. METHODS: We undertook a pilot study that compared a nurse case-manager to the multifaceted intervention using a randomized trial design. The case-manager counseled patients, arranged bone mineral density (BMD) tests, and prescribed treatments. We included controls from our first trial who remained untreated for osteoporosis 1-year post-fracture. Primary outcome was bisphosphonate treatment and secondary outcomes were BMD testing, appropriate care (BMD test-treatment if bone mass low), and costs. RESULTS: Forty six patients untreated 1-year after wrist fracture were randomized to case-manager (n = 21) or multifaceted intervention (n = 25). Median age was 60 years and 68% were female. Six months post-randomization, 9 (43%) case-managed patients were treated with bisphosphonates compared with 3 (12%) multifaceted intervention patients (relative risk [RR] 3.6, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.1-11.5, p = 0.019). Case-managed patients were more likely than multifaceted intervention patients to undergo BMD tests (81% vs 52%, RR 1.6, 95%CI 1.1-2.4, p = 0.042) and receive appropriate care (57% vs 28%, RR 2.0, 95%CI 1.0-4.2, p = 0.048). Case-management cost was $44 (CDN) per patient vs $12 for the multifaceted intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A nurse case-manager substantially increased rates of appropriate testing and treatment for osteoporosis in patients at high-risk of future fracture when compared with a multifaceted quality improvement intervention aimed at patients and physicians. Even with case-management, nearly half of patients did not receive appropriate care. TRIAL REGISTRY: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00152321.

The novice perioperative educator: perspectives and comments from mentors.

Fulfilling the role of the perioperative educator can be a complex and overwhelming task. Complexity and anxieties are enhanced when the responsibilities of the perioperative educator are performed as an additional duty. This is especially true for the beginning educator. Developing a pool of resources and identifying mentors in the education arena can provide invaluable insight and support in performing the tasks of the position. This article investigates the feelings associated with performance of the duties of the peroperative educator from the perspective of a novice. Discussions with two mentors regarding the aspects of orientation, competency assessment, in-service training, and where to find additional information are summarized.