Coordinator-based systems for secondary prevention in fragility fracture patients

Understanding osteoporosis and fractures: an introduction to the use of qualitative research

BACKGROUND

Qualitative research has been recognized in recent years as a field of inquiry used to understand people's beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, culture or lifestyle. While quantitative results are challenging to apply in everyday practice, the qualitative paradigm can be useful to fill in a research context that is poorly understood or ill-defined. It can provide an in-depth study of interactions, a way to incorporate context, and a means to hear the voices of participants. Understanding experiences, motivation, and beliefs can have a profound effect on the interpretation of quantitative research and generating hypotheses. In this paper, we will review different qualitative approaches that healthcare providers and researchers may find useful to implement in future study designs, specifically in the context of osteoporosis and fracture.

METHODS

We will provide insight into the qualitative paradigm gained from the osteoporosis literature on fractures using examples from the database Scopus. Five prominent qualitative techniques (narratives, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study) can be used to generate meanings of the social and clinical world.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

We have highlighted how these strategies are implemented in qualitative research on osteoporosis and fractures and are anchored to specific methodological practices. We focus on studies that explore patient psychosocial experiences of diagnosis and treatment, cultural boundaries, and interprofessional communication. After reviewing the research, we believe that action research, that is not frequently used, could also effectively be used by many professions to improve programs and policies affecting those dealing with osteoporosis issues.

Effect of a dedicated osteoporosis health professional on screening and treatment in outpatients presenting with acute low trauma non-hip fracture: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to identify the effect a dedicated osteoporosis health professional on screening and treatment in outpatients presenting with acute low trauma fracture. A dedicated osteoporosis health professional improved investigation and management of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis management was enhanced, leading to the potential for future fracture prevention.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to review the effect a dedicated osteoporosis health professional on screening and treatment in outpatients presenting with acute low trauma fracture.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents Connect, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP, and Cochrane from database development to April 2013, examined grey literature, and completed manual searches of reference lists to identify English language research that examined the effect that dedicated health professional input had on osteoporosis management with acute low trauma non-hip fracture in the outpatient setting. Outcomes were defined as the proportion of patients with investigation (bone mineral density (BMD) or blood screen); treated with vitamin D supplementation or antiresorptive agent; documented BMD reading change; recurrent fracture occurrence; or referral to specialist bone (osteoporosis) clinic.

RESULTS

All studies with a suitable control group showed an increase in BMD screening in the intervention group (odds ratio (OR) 5.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.3-6.9, P<0.0001). The effect on treatment initiation showed a significantly increased rate of antiresorptive±vitamin D therapy (OR 5.3, 95% CI 4.1-6.8, P<0.0001). No studies examined improvement or decline in BMD guiding clinical practice as an outcome. Two studies showed reduced fracture recurrence. The osteoporosis health professional significantly increased referrals to a specialist bone clinic (OR 9.6, 95% CI 6.2-14.6, P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of a dedicated osteoporosis health professional coordinating a targeted intervention for outpatients with low trauma non-hip fracture improves investigation and management of osteoporosis, resulting in the potential for future fracture prevention.

Fracture prevention in patients with cognitive impairment presenting with a hip fracture: secondary analysis of data from the HORIZON Recurrent Fracture Trial

Patients with cognitive impairment (CI) often do not receive secondary fracture prevention. Use of zoledronic acid led to a similar reduction in re-fracture risk but the survival benefit was limited to those without CI.

INTRODUCTION

We tested whether the effects of zoledronic acid (Zol) on re-fracture and mortality differed in patients presenting with a hip fracture by cognitive status.

METHODS

We used data from the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly Recurrent Fracture Trial, of yearly intravenous 5 mg Zol vs. placebo in patients presenting with a hip fracture. Primary outcome was new fracture and secondary outcome mortality. Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) with a cut-point of >2 was used to identify CI. Fine-Gray models for competing events were fitted to study the effect of Zol on re-fracture and Cox regression for death. A multiplicative term was introduced to study a potential interaction between treatment and cognitive status on outcomes.

RESULTS

Baseline SPMSQ of 1,966/2,127 (92.4%) patients was measured. Three hundred fifty (17.8%) had CI, balanced between treatment arms. In the placebo arm, there was similar fracture incidence between those with and without CI (15.4 vs. 12.3%, p = 0.26). There was no significant interaction for the effect of CI on Zol and re-fracture (p = 0.66). CI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (12.6 vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001) and the interaction was bordering significance (interaction, p = 0.066). Zol prolonged survival only in patients with normal cognitive status [HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.40-0.80)] and not in those with CI [HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.59-1.38)].

CONCLUSIONS

While these results require confirmation, the findings support the use of bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporotic fracture and CI expected to live for more than 6 months.

Patients' response toward an automated orthopedic osteoporosis intervention program

Osteoporosis is overshadowed in an era of chronic illnesses, and a care gap exists between physicians and patients. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of implementing an automated system for identifying and sending a letter to patients at high risk for osteoporosis. Patients 50 years of age and older were tagged with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnostic code upon initial visit to the emergency department (ED), identifying potential fragility fractures. Automatically generated letters were sent via our osteoporosis database system to each patient 3 months after the initial visit to the ED. The letter indicated that he or she was at risk for osteoporosis and suggested that the patient schedule a follow-up appointment with a physician. Patients were subsequently telephoned 3 months after receiving the letter and asked about their current plan for follow-up. The control group did not receive a letter after departure from the ED. In the control group, 84 (85.71%) individuals of the total 98 did not have any follow-up but the remaining 14 (14.29%) sought a follow-up. In the intervention group, 62 (60.19%) individuals of 103 did schedule a follow-up, while the remaining 41 (39.81%) did not seek a follow-up. Thus, the patient follow-up response rate after fracture treatment improved with intervention (P < .0001). Current literature has demonstrated the low rate of follow-up care addressing osteoporosis in patients experiencing fragility fractures (1%-25% without intervention). Research has shown the effectiveness of various types of intervention programs for improving the continuum of care for these high-risk patients. Nonautomated intervention programs can have a multitude of human-related system failures in identifying these patients. Our study successfully implements an automated system that is able to be applied to most hospitals with minimal cost and resources.

Secondary prevention and estimation of fracture risk

The key questions addressed in this chapter are: • How can individual risk of fracture be best estimated? • What is the best system to prevent a further fracture? • How to implement systems for preventing further fractures? Absolute fracture risk calculators (FRCs) provide a means to estimate an individual's future fracture risk. FRCs are widely available and provide clinicians and patients a platform to discuss the need for intervention to prevent fragility fractures. Despite availability of effective osteoporosis medicines for almost two decades, most patients presenting with new fragility fractures do not receive secondary preventive care. The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) model has been shown in a number of countries to eliminate the care gap in a clinically and cost-effective manner. Leading international and national organisations have developed comprehensive resources and/or national strategy documents to provide guidance on implementation of FLS in local, regional and national health-care systems.

Secondary prevention of osteoporosis in non-neck of femur fragility fractures: is it value for money? A retrospective, prospective and cross-sectional cohort study

Background

Osteoporosis is one of the commonest bone diseases in which bone fragility is increased. Over 300,000 patients present to hospitals in the UK with fragility fractures each year, with medical and social care costs - most of which relate to hip fracture care - at around £2 billion. The number of these fractures rises by 2% a year. The 30 days mortality is 10% and 30% at 1 year. The purpose of this study is to review the current practice according to NICE and BOA guidelines of secondary prevention of osteoporosis and to suggest changes to these guidelines.

Methods

Patients over 50 years old admitted as inpatients to our facility with non-neck-of-femur (NOF) fragility fractures in March and September 2008 were studied. Retrospectively (March), looking for risk factors and if treated or not, then prospectively (September), after introducing the new trauma admission sheet. Also cross-sectional study was performed by comparing the services provided for NOF and non-NOF fragility fractures in September. Two-sample t test is used to compare between percentages.

Results

Twenty-nine percent of fragility fractures are non-NOF fractures with a mean age of 70 years, while the remaining 71% are NOF fractures with a mean age of 80 years. There is a great difference in the care provided to these patients: non-NOF fragility fractures got less attention for assessment of osteoporosis (25%) and obtained less interest in investigations by medical staff (11%) and, finally, less intentions to treat osteoporosis (35%), compared to NOF fractures in which 35% of cases were assessed, 47% were investigated and 71% were treated for osteoporosis. Twenty-five percent of NOF fracture patients were found to have previous fragility fractures in the preceding years, while only 6% were on osteoporosis treatment before the fracture.

Conclusion

Osteoporosis (a new epidemic) is the most common disease of the bone and its incidence is rising rapidly as the population ages. Though treatable, it is often left untreated. We believe that treating patients with non-NOF fragility fractures from osteoporosis before proceeding to NOF fractures would improve their quality of life and reduce the burden on hospital services and funding.

Secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures--an "OPTIMAL" model of care from Singapore

A significant care gap exists in the management of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporosis Patient Targeted and Integrated Management for Active Living (OPTIMAL) is a secondary fracture prevention program instituted in the public hospitals of Singapore. We aim to describe the operational characteristics of OPTIMAL and initial audit data of patients who were recruited into the program at Singapore General Hospital.

INTRODUCTION

Fractures often represent the first opportunity for care of osteoporosis. However, a significant care gap still exists in the management of these sentinel events and underdiagnosis and undertreatment of osteoporotic fractures are prevalent worldwide. Fracture liaison services run by care coordinators have been shown to reduce the fracture care gap. OPTIMAL is a clinician champion-driven, case manager-run secondary fracture prevention program set up in the public hospitals of Singapore in 2008.

METHODS

We present the operational characteristics and initial audit data of OPTIMAL from the largest tertiary teaching hospital in Singapore.

RESULTS

One thousand and fourteen patients have been recruited into OPTIMAL at our hospital since 2008, and 476 patients are currently in active follow-up. Two hundred and eighty-seven patients had completed a 2-year follow-up at the hospital as of August 2012 and were evaluated; 97.5% of these patients had DXA evaluation upon enrollment into the program, and 62% of the patients reported compliance with an exercise program over the 2-year follow-up. Compliance to osteoporosis medications as estimated by the medication possession ratio (MPR) was 72.8 ± 34.5% at 2 years with patients maintaining good compliance (MPR ≥ 80%) for an average of 20.2 months (95% CI 19.3-21.1).

CONCLUSION

Our report provides the first compelling evidence of the potential success of a secondary fracture prevention program from an Asian country. The ultimate success of the program will be determined by fracture outcomes and cost effectiveness, but in the interim, clear evidence of enhanced assessment and treatment rates has been demonstrated.

Identifying a standard set of outcome parameters for the evaluation of orthogeriatric co-management for hip fractures

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Osteoporotic fractures are an increasing problem in the world due to the ageing of the population. Different models of orthogeriatric co-management are currently in use worldwide. These models differ for instance by the health-care professional who has the responsibility for care in the acute and early rehabilitation phases. There is no international consensus regarding the best model of care and which outcome parameters should be used to evaluate these models. The goal of this project was to identify which outcome parameters and assessment tools should be used to measure and compare outcome changes that can be made by the implementation of orthogeriatric co-management models and to develop recommendations about how and when these outcome parameters should be measured. It was not the purpose of this study to describe items that might have an impact on the outcome but cannot be influenced such as age, co-morbidities and cognitive impairment at admission.

METHODS

Based on a review of the literature on existing orthogeriatric co-management evaluation studies, 14 outcome parameters were evaluated and discussed in a 2-day meeting with panellists. These panellists were selected based on research and/or clinical expertise in hip fracture management and a common interest in measuring outcome in hip fracture care.

RESULTS

We defined 12 objective and subjective outcome parameters and how they should be measured: mortality, length of stay, time to surgery, complications, re-admission rate, mobility, quality of life, pain, activities of daily living, medication use, place of residence and costs. We could not recommend an appropriate tool to measure patients' satisfaction and falls. We defined the time points at which these outcome parameters should be collected to be at admission and discharge, 30 days, 90 days and 1 year after admission.

CONCLUSION

Twelve objective and patient-reported outcome parameters were selected to form a standard set for the measurement of influenceable outcome of patients treated in different models of orthogeriatric co-managed care.

A Year of Fractures: a snapshot analysis of the logistics, problems and outcomes of a hospital-based fracture liaison service

SUMMARY

Our fracture liaison service identifies patients with low trauma fractures, determines the need for osteoporosis therapy and instigates therapy if necessary. We describe the tracking and outcome of 768 patients attending our emergency department over 1 year and discuss the problems we encountered and potential solutions.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporotic fractures result in substantial morbidity, mortality and economic cost, and patients sustaining a first fracture are known to be at higher risk of sustaining future fracture. Treatment of at-risk patients has been shown to assist in prevention of future fracture including hip fracture. We established a "First Fracture Project" to identify and treat these patients in 2003.

METHODS

We assessed "A Year of Fractures": the logistics, outcome and problems in tracking patients presenting to our emergency department with a low trauma fracture by our fracture liaison service, over 1 year from July 2008 to June 2009. Patients were tracked by our osteoporosis nurse and offered assessment, and treatment where necessary.

RESULTS

In 1 year, 768 patients aged 50 or over were identified from emergency department records as attending with a low trauma fracture. About 84 % of patients eventually received assessment. Of the162 patients progressing through the entire process, 74 % had osteoporosis treatment planned and/or commenced.

CONCLUSIONS

Our fracture liaison service was effective at identifying most low trauma fracture patients at risk of further fracture and providing access to osteoporosis assessment. There were many difficulties: we outline logistic and practical issues in delivering our service and suggest potential improvements.

Capture the Fracture: a Best Practice Framework and global campaign to break the fragility fracture cycle

The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) Capture the Fracture Campaign aims to support implementation of Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) throughout the world.

INTRODUCTION

FLS have been shown to close the ubiquitous secondary fracture prevention care gap, ensuring that fragility fracture sufferers receive appropriate assessment and intervention to reduce future fracture risk.

METHODS

Capture the Fracture has developed internationally endorsed standards for best practice, will facilitate change at the national level to drive adoption of FLS and increase awareness of the challenges and opportunities presented by secondary fracture prevention to key stakeholders. The Best Practice Framework (BPF) sets an international benchmark for FLS, which defines essential and aspirational elements of service delivery.

RESULTS

The BPF has been reviewed by leading experts from many countries and subject to beta-testing to ensure that it is internationally relevant and fit-for-purpose. The BPF will also serve as a measurement tool for IOF to award 'Capture the Fracture Best Practice Recognition' to celebrate successful FLS worldwide and drive service development in areas of unmet need. The Capture the Fracture website will provide a suite of resources related to FLS and secondary fracture prevention, which will be updated as new materials become available. A mentoring programme will enable those in the early stages of development of FLS to learn from colleagues elsewhere that have achieved Best Practice Recognition. A grant programme is in development to aid clinical systems which require financial assistance to establish FLS in their localities.

CONCLUSION

Nearly half a billion people will reach retirement age during the next 20 years. IOF has developed Capture the Fracture because this is the single most important thing that can be done to directly improve patient care, of both women and men, and reduce the spiralling fracture-related care costs worldwide.

The role of community pharmacists in the prevention and management of osteoporosis and the risk of falls: results of a cross-sectional study and qualitative interviews

In a mailed survey and qualitative interviews, it was observed that community pharmacists and public health authorities believe that pharmacists should play a significant role in the prevention and management of osteoporosis and the risk of falls. However, pharmacists acknowledge a wide gap between their ideal and actual levels of involvement.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of community pharmacists and public health authorities regarding the role of pharmacists in providing services in relation to osteoporosis and risk of falls and the barriers to providing them.

METHODS

Using a modified five-step version of Dillman's tailored design method, a questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 1,250 community pharmacists practicing in Montreal (Quebec, Canada) and surrounding areas. A similar questionnaire was sent to public health officers in these regions. Additionally, telephone interviews were conducted with regional and ministry level public health officers.

RESULTS

Of the 1,250 pharmacists contacted, 28 were ineligible. In all, 571 of 1,222 (46.7 %) eligible community pharmacists and all the public health officers returned the questionnaire. Six public health officers (five regional and one at ministry level) were interviewed. Most pharmacists believed they should be involved in screening for osteoporosis (46.6 %) and risk of falls (50.3 %); however, fewer reported actually being involved in such services (17.4 % and 19.2 %, respectively). In their view, the main barriers to providing these services in current practice were lack of time (78.8 %), lack of clinical tools (65.4 %), and lack of coordination with other healthcare professionals (54.5 %). Public health authorities also thought community pharmacists should play a significant role in providing osteoporosis and fall risk services. However, few community pharmacist-mediated activities are in place in the participating regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although community pharmacists and public health authorities believe pharmacists should play a significant role with regard to osteoporosis and the risk of falls, they acknowledge a wide gap between the ideal and actual levels of pharmacist involvement.

A fracture prevention service reduces further fractures two years after incident minimal trauma fracture

AIM

To evaluate the impact of a fracture prevention clinic service on initiation of treatment, continuing treatment and subsequent minimal trauma fractures (MTF).

METHOD

Participants were people aged 50 and over, with a minimal trauma fracture presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) in a large tertiary referral hospital in New South Wales, Australia, between February 2007 and March 2009. A cohort of patients who attended a Fracture Prevention Clinic (clinic group) were compared with a cohort who did not attend the clinic (non-clinic group). A telephone questionnaire was conducted with participants or their carers between December 2010 and April 2011 at least 12 months post-fracture presentation. Questionnaire items included demographics, fracture types, osteoporosis treatment, recurrent fractures and smoking and dietary habits. Data were compared using chi-squared test for categorical variables and Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fourteen clinic attendees and 220 non-clinic attendees were surveyed between 12 and 40 months (mean 24 months) post-initial fracture. New fracture rates were lower in the clinic group (5.1%) than the non-clinic group (16.4%, P < 0.001). Treatment rates for bone fragility were higher in the clinic group (81.3%) than in the non-clinic group (54.1%, P < 0.001) with 66.8% of the clinic group and 34.1% of the non-clinic group on a bisphosphonate or strontium ranelate at the time of the survey (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients managed by a fracture prevention clinic service following a MTF have fewer new fractures and are more likely to be on treatment for bone fragility.

Prevalence of undisclosed osteoporosis in patients with minimal trauma fractures: a prospective cohort study

Despite epidemiologic evidence for the presence of osteoporosis in patients with minimal trauma fractures, screening programs have not been routinely established in Australian ambulatory care clinics. Our study assessed the prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia in patients at a tertiary care hospital to gather local data to support policy change that favors bone mineral density screening. Our prospective observational study enrolled 115 patients, aged > 40 years, who had experienced a minimal trauma fracture. Inclusion criteria required that the patient had no history of testing for osteoporosis or metabolic bone disease/major pathology. The patients were recruited over a 6-month period. Eleven participants were excluded and 7 participants withdrew from the study, with a total of 97 patients completing the study. Participants were assessed for osteoporosis risk via bone mineral density measurement by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and blood screening for bone mineral levels, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, and parathyroid hormone levels. In our study patients, the prevalence of previously undiagnosed osteoporosis was 19%, undiagnosed osteopenia, 50%, and the standard bone mineral density was 32%. The most common risk factors for osteoporosis/osteopenia were smoking (22%), alcohol intake (16%), and corticosteroid use (9%). In 67% of patients, 25-hydroxyvitamin D level was in the low clinical range in 51% of patients, magnesium levels were in the high range and 18% of patients had elevated serum parathyroid levels. At month 12 of our study, 80 participants were available for follow-up: 2 patients had sustained a second fracture (1 was minimal trauma); 6 patients had required further surgery (3 fracture fixations, 3 for removal of internal fixation devices); 26 patients continued treatment regimens with calcium and 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation; and 28 patients had been prescribed bisphosphonates, with 22 patients complying with the prescription. The high prevalence of previously undiagnosed low bone mass in our study patient population, each of whom had experienced minimal trauma falls, provides impetus for the provision of osteoporosis screening programs and corresponding treatment as needed.

The osteoporotic acetabular fracture

Fractures of the acetabulum are some of the most challenging fractures that face orthopedic surgeons. In geriatric patients, these challenges are enhanced by the complexity of fracture patterns, the poor biomechanical characteristics of osteoporotic bone, and the comorbidities present in this population. Nonsurgical management is preferable when the fracture is stable enough to allow mobilization, and healing in a functional position can be expected. When significant displacement and/or hip instability are present, operative management is preferred in most patients, which may include open reduction and internal fixation with or without total hip arthroplasty.

Initiation of osteoporosis assessment in the fracture clinic results in improved osteoporosis management: a randomised controlled trial

Osteoporosis management post fragility fracture has traditionally been deficient with up to 60-90 % of patients remaining untreated for osteoporosis in some studies. Efforts have been made to address this deficiency with some successes reported.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of two different models of screening for osteoporosis in a community fracture clinic setting.

METHODS

A prospective randomised clinical trial was conducted to assess the DXA scan and treatment rates in patients with fragility fractures when assessment for osteoporosis had been initiated in the fracture clinic compared with the "usual care" of assessment initiation by the participant's general practitioner.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were enrolled in the study. Thirty-three patients each were in the control and intervention groups. The assessment rate (DXA scan rate) was significantly better in the intervention group where participants were referred for assessment from fracture clinic compared to the control group where participants were referred for assessment by their general practitioner (68 vs 36 %, respectively; p < 0.05). For patients who were assessed for osteoporosis, treatment rates were similar in both the control and intervention groups (100 vs 88 %, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that screening for osteoporosis initiated in fracture clinic results in improved osteoporosis management compared to screening initiated in primary care. Orthopaedic surgeons and other specialists need to be more active in managing osteoporosis in patients who present with fragility fractures and should at the very least initiate assessment in the fracture clinic setting.

Best practices in secondary fracture prevention: fracture liaison services

Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) have been demonstrated in many countries to provide an effective means to deliver secondary preventive care for patients presenting with fragility fractures. This review provides an update on journal articles, reports, guidelines and government policies, with relevance to FLS, which have been published during the period 2009-2012. International evidence of the extent and persistence of the secondary fracture prevention care gap has expanded during this period. Major professional and patient societies throughout the world, including the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, have supported international initiatives to disseminate best practice. Health economic analysis of FLS has developed considerably, with a consistent theme from investigator-led and government analyses that FLS provide highly cost-effective care. Opportunities to close the care gap, in a systematic way, for unrecognised vertebral fracture sufferers are also considered.

Does insufficient access to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) stifle the provision of quality osteoporosis care in New Zealand?

Access to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning varies significantly throughout New Zealand with the majority of scans funded privately or through the health industry. Barriers to access need to be addressed if osteoporosis guidelines are to be implemented across the country equitably, to reduce the incidence and cost of fragility fractures in New Zealand.

PURPOSE

This study aims (1) to estimate the number of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans performed in New Zealand, (2) to determine funding sources of DXA scans and (3) to determine the level of regional variation in access.

METHODS

DXA scan providers in New Zealand were accessed through a nationwide database and asked to provide data on DXA scans performed in 2007. The numbers of DXA scans performed in each District Health Board (DHB) region were calculated by using a funding source and compared with DHB population estimates provided by Statistics New Zealand for 2007.

RESULTS

In New Zealand in 2007, 33,104 DXA scans were performed, with a population rate of 78.1 DXA scans per annum per 10,000 general population, significantly less than international guidelines. There were important regional differences in access to DXA scanning. Funding for scans was predominately by private and pharmaceutical industry funders. DHBs funded only 31 % of DXA scans during this time period.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to DXA scan technology varies significantly throughout New Zealand, with the majority of DXA scans funded by the private sector or health industry. Barriers to access need to be addressed if osteoporosis guidelines are to be implemented across the country in an equitable fashion and so reduce the incidence and cost of fragility fractures to New Zealand.

Making the first fracture the last fracture: ASBMR task force report on secondary fracture prevention

Fragility fractures are common, affecting almost one in two older women and one in three older men. Every fragility fracture signals increased risk of future fractures as well as risk of premature mortality. Despite the major health care impact worldwide, currently there are few systems in place to identify and "capture" individuals after a fragility fracture to ensure appropriate assessment and treatment (according to national guidelines) to reduce future fracture risk and adverse health outcomes. The Task Force reviewed the current evidence about different systematic interventional approaches, their logical background, as well as the medical and ethical rationale. This included reviewing the evidence supporting cost-effective interventions and developing a toolkit for reducing secondary fracture incidence. This report presents this evidence for cost-effective interventions versus the human and health care costs associated with the failure to address further fractures. In particular, it summarizes the evidence for various forms of Fracture Liaison Service as the most effective intervention for secondary fracture prevention. It also summarizes the evidence that certain interventions, particularly those based on patient and/or community-focused educational approaches, are consistently, if unexpectedly, ineffective. As an international group, representing 36 countries throughout Asia-Pacific, South America, Europe, and North America, the Task Force reviewed and summarized the international data on barriers encountered in implementing risk-reduction strategies. It presents the ethical imperatives for providing quality of care in osteoporosis management. As part of an implementation strategy, it describes both the quality improvement methods best suited to transforming care and the research questions that remain outstanding. The overarching outcome of the Task Force's work has been the provision of a rational background and the scientific evidence underpinning secondary fracture prevention and stresses the utility of one form or another of a Fracture Liaison Service in achieving those quality outcomes worldwide. © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Development of an electronic medical record based intervention to improve medical care of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is infrequently addressed during hospitalization for osteoporotic fractures. An EMR-based intervention (osteoporosis order set) was developed with physician and patient input. There was a trend toward greater calcium supplementation from July 2008 to April 2009 (s = 0.058); however, use of antiresorptives (13%) or discharge instructions for BMD testing and osteoporosis treatment (10%) remained low.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is infrequently addressed during hospitalization for osteoporotic fractures. The study population consisted of patients over 50 years of age.

METHODS

Northwestern Memorial Hospital is a tertiary care academic hospital in Chicago. This study was conducted from September 1, 2007 through June 30, 2009.

RESULTS

Physicians reported that barriers to care comprised nonacute nature of osteoporosis, belief that osteoporosis should be addressed by the PCP, low awareness of recurrent fractures, and radiographs with terms such as "compression deformity", "wedge deformity", or "vertebral height loss" which in their opinion were not clearly indicative of vertebral fractures. An EMR-based intervention was developed with physician and patient input. Over the evaluation period, 295 fracture cases in individuals over the age of 50 years in the medicine floors were analyzed. Mean age was 72 ± 11 years; 74% were female. Sites of fracture included hip n = 78 (27%), vertebral n = 87 (30%), lower extremity n = 61 (21%), upper extremity n = 43 (15%) and pelvis n = 26 (9%). There was no increase in documentation of osteoporosis in the medical record from pre- to post-EMR implementation (p = 0.89). There was a trend toward greater calcium supplementation from July 2008 to April 2009 (p = 0.058); however, use of antiresorptives (13%) or discharge instructions for BMD testing and osteoporosis treatment (10%) remained low.

CONCLUSION

An electronic medical record intervention without electronic reminders created with physician input achieves an increase in calcium supplementation but fails to increase diagnosis or treatment for osteoporosis at the time of hospitalization for a fragility fracture.

What's in a name? What constitutes the clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis?

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder in which reductions in bone strength predispose to an increased risk for fractures. Currently, the diagnosis is officially made based exclusively on bone mineral density T-scores that are ≤-2.5 at the spine or hip. Limiting the clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis solely to a T-score-based criterion, which is the official convention in the USA, creates uncertainty about the use of the term osteoporosis to diagnose older women and men who have T-scores >-2.5, but either have already sustained low-trauma fractures or are recognized as having high fracture risk based on absolute fracture risk calculations from FRAX or other algorithms. A failure to diagnose such patients as having osteoporosis may be one component of the well-documented underdiagnosis and undertreatment of this disease which limits our ability to reduce the burden of fractures worldwide. There is a need to expand the criteria for making a clinical diagnosis and to codify these changes in order to help patients, physicians, policy makers, and payers better understand who has this disease and the elevated risk for fracture that it represents.

Knowledge of orthopaedic surgeons in managing patients with fragility fracture

PURPOSE

Fragility fractures represent a major health problem, as they cause deformity, disability and increased mortality rates. Orthopaedic surgeons should identify patients with fragility fractures and manage their osteoporosis in order to reduce the risk of future fracture; therefore, orthopaedic surgeons' knowledge about managing fragile fracture should be evaluated.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to 2,910 orthopaedic surgeons to address the respondents' knowledge. The questions covered the topics of diagnosis, treatment and approach to a patient with a fragility fracture. The data-collection period for this survey spanned one year.

RESULTS

There were 2,021 orthopaedic surgeons who participated in this study. Less than 10% of the respondents included bone mass densitometry (BMD) when evaluating patients with fragile fractures 32% prescribed proper dosage of calcium and vitamin D; approximately 30% would refer if falling from a height was suspected.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of orthopaedic surgeons questioned lacked knowledge of fragility fracture management. This is reflected by limited knowledge of osteoporosis assessment and treatment in most areas. An appropriate method should be created to manage patients with fragility fractures to guarantee the patient the best possible care.

Osteoporosis, frailty and fracture: implications for case finding and therapy

In almost all patients with incident fractures, the absolute risk of subsequent fracture and mortality is highest immediately after the fracture is incurred; the risk is substantially increased in frail elderly patients. The risk factors for incident fractures, such as bone fragility, tendency to fall and the presence of metabolic bone disease, remain underdiagnosed and undertreated. Here, we review the evidence that demonstrates the influence of these risk factors on susceptibility to subsequent fracture and mortality after an incident fracture, and discuss the tools available to predict these outcomes. In this Review, we also propose a systematic, coordinator-based approach to assessment of risk, allocation of treatment and follow-up in all patients over 50 years of age who present with a fracture. The aim of this proposed multistep procedure is to improve the prevention of secondary fracture, decrease mortality rates and reduce patient undertreatment or overtreatment.

Cost-effectiveness of the Concord Minimal Trauma Fracture Liaison service, a prospective, controlled fracture prevention study

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a fracture liaison service prospectively designed to have a parallel control group treated by standard care. The clinical effectiveness of this service was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio versus standard care of Australian dollars (AUD) 17,291 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporotic fractures are a major burden for national health services. The risk of re-fracture following an osteoporotic fracture is particularly high. In a study unique in prospectively having a control group treated by standard care, we recently demonstrated that a Minimal Trauma Fracture Liaison (MTFL) service significantly reduces the risk of re-fracture by 80%. Since the service involves greater use of resources, we have now evaluated whether it is cost-effective.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed that incorporated fracture probabilities and resource utilization data (expressed in AUD) obtained directly from the 4-year MTFL service clinical study. Resource utilization, local cost and mortality data and fracture-related health utility data were used to calculate QALYs with the MTFL service and standard care. Main outcome measures were: additional costs of the MTFL service over standard care, the financial savings achieved through reduced fractures and changes in QALYs associated with reduced fractures calculated over a 10-year simulation period. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 5% annually. Sensitivity analyses quantified the effects of different assumptions of effectiveness and resource utilization associated with the MTFL service.

RESULTS

The MTFL service improved QALYs by 0.089 years and led to increased costs of AUD 1,486 per patient versus standard care over the 10-year simulation period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio versus standard care was AUD 17,291 per QALY gained. Results were robust under all plausible assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

The MTFL service is a cost-effective intervention to reduce recurrent osteoporotic fractures.

Closing the gap in postfracture care at the population level: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postfracture care is suboptimal, and strategies to address this major gap in care are necessary. We investigated whether notifications sent by mail to physicians and patients would lead to improved postfracture care.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00594789) in the province of Manitoba, Canada, from June 2008 to May 2010. Using medical claims data, we identified 4264 men and women age 50 years or older who recently reported major fractures, and who had not undergone recent bone mineral density testing or treatment for osteoporosis. Participants were randomized to three groups: group 1 received usual care (n = 1480), patients in group 2 had mailed notification of the fracture sent to their primary care physicians (n = 1363), and group 3 had notifications sent to both physicians and patients (n = 1421). Bone mineral density testing and the start of pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis within the following 12 months were documented.

RESULTS

Among participants in group 1 (usual care), 15.8% of women and 7.6% of men underwent testing for bone mineral density or started pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis. Outcome measures improved among participants in group 2 (30.3% of women and 19.0% of men, both p < 0.001) and group 3 (34.0% of women and 19.8% of men, both p < 0.001). No additional benefit was seen with patient notification in addition to physician notification. Combining groups 2 and 3, the absolute increase for the combined end point of bone mineral density testing or pharmacologic treatment was 14.9% (16.4% among women, 11.8% among men). The number needed to notify to change patient care was 7 (6 for women, 6 for men). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) to change patient care in group 2 was 2.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01-2.98); for group 3 the OR was 2.82 (95% CI 2.33-3.43).

INTERPRETATION

This notification system provides a relatively simple way to enhance post-fracture care.