A demonstration project of a multi-component educational intervention to improve integrated post-fracture osteoporosis care in five rural communities in Ontario, Canada

A Population-Based Registry Study of Extended Bisphosphonate Use: Minimal Shift After Landmark Publications About Shorter Treatment Duration

Optimal duration of bisphosphonate therapy was unknown until the FLEX study was published in 2006 showing a 5-year course to be adequate for most women. In 2008, a link between long-term bisphosphonate and atypical femoral fractures was reported and confirmed in later studies. We hypothesized these landmark observations should have led to a decrease in use of bisphosphonates for >5 or 10 years, from 2010 onward. The Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Registry with linkage to provincial pharmacy data was used to determine the percentage of long- and very long-term bisphosphonate users from therapy start. The cohort comprised women aged >50 years with BMD between 1995 and 2018 with oral bisphosphonate first prescribed for >90 days with adherence >75% in the first year. For each calendar year of continued therapy, the percentage of patients and medication possession rate was tabulated. The percentage of users beyond 5 years was compared among patients who started therapy in 1998-2004 (those taking 5 years of therapy still finish before 2010) versus 2005-2012 (all new therapy starts overlap 2010 in those taking ≥5 years of treatment). The cohort included 2991 women with mean follow-up 8.8 (1.3) years, 64.9% of whom took continuous oral bisphosphonate for >5 years and 41.9% for >10 years. In the earlier versus later era, there were 74.4% versus 70.2% who completed 5 years. With respect to longer treatment, there were 68.0% and 60.5% of patients treated for 6 or more years (p < 0.0001) and 46.6% versus 33.5% treated for >10 years (p = 0.08). Medication possession rate was >79% in every year of therapy. Landmark studies leading to more limited bisphosphonate courses may have slightly reduced longer-term treatment, but up to one-third of adherent patients in the modern era still receive continuous bisphosphonate therapy for >10 years. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

The integrated structure of care: evidence for the efficacy of models of clinical governance in the prevention of fragility fractures after recent sentinel fracture after the age of 50 years

Randomized clinical trials and observational studies on the implementation of clinical governance models, in patients who had experienced a fragility fracture, were examined. Literature was systematically reviewed and summarized by a panel of experts who formulated recommendations for the Italian guideline.

PURPOSE

After experiencing a fracture, several strategies may be adopted to reduce the risk of recurrent fragility fractures and associated morbidity and mortality. Clinical governance models, such as the fracture liaison service (FLS), have been introduced for the identification, treatment, and monitoring of patients with secondary fragility fractures. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the association between multidisciplinary care systems and several outcomes in patients with a fragility fracture in the context of the development of the Italian Guidelines.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were investigated up to December 2020 to update the search of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies that analyzed clinical governance models in patients who had experienced a fragility fracture were eligible. Three authors independently extracted data and appraised the risk of bias in the included studies. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Effect sizes were pooled in a meta-analysis using random-effects models. Primary outcomes were bone mineral density values, antiosteoporotic therapy initiation, adherence to antiosteoporotic medications, subsequent fracture, and mortality risk, while secondary outcomes were quality of life and physical performance.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs and 62 observational studies, ranging from very low to low quality for bone mineral density values, antiosteoporotic initiation, adherence to antiosteoporotic medications, subsequent fracture, mortality, met our inclusion criteria. The implementation of clinical governance models compared to their pre-implementation or standard care/non-attenders significantly improved BMD testing rate, and increased the number of patients who initiated antiosteoporotic therapy and enhanced their adherence to the medications. Moreover, the treatment by clinical governance model respect to standard care/non-attenders significantly reduced the risk of subsequent fracture and mortality. The integrated structure of care enhanced the quality of life and physical function among patients with fragility fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, clinicians should promote the management of patients experiencing a fragility fracture through structured and integrated models of care. The task force has formulated appropriate recommendations on the implementation of multidisciplinary care systems in patients with, or at risk of, fragility fractures.

Executive summary: Italian guidelines for diagnosis, risk stratification, and care continuity of fragility fractures 2021

Background

Fragility fractures are a major public health concern owing to their worrying and growing burden and their onerous burden upon health systems. There is now a substantial body of evidence that individuals who have already suffered a fragility fracture are at a greater risk for further fractures, thus suggesting the potential for secondary prevention in this field.

Purpose

This guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for recognizing, stratifying the risk, treating, and managing patients with fragility fracture. This is a summary version of the full Italian guideline.

Methods

The Italian Fragility Fracture Team appointed by the Italian National Health Institute was employed from January 2020 to February 2021 to (i) identify previously published systematic reviews and guidelines on the field, (ii) formulate relevant clinical questions, (iii) systematically review literature and summarize evidence, (iv) draft the Evidence to Decision Framework, and (v) formulate recommendations.

Results

Overall, 351 original papers were included in our systematic review to answer six clinical questions. Recommendations were categorized into issues concerning (i) frailty recognition as the cause of bone fracture, (ii) (re)fracture risk assessment, for prioritizing interventions, and (iii) treatment and management of patients experiencing fragility fractures. Six recommendations were overall developed, of which one, four, and one were of high, moderate, and low quality, respectively.

Conclusions

The current guidelines provide guidance to support individualized management of patients experiencing non-traumatic bone fracture to benefit from secondary prevention of (re)fracture. Although our recommendations are based on the best available evidence, questionable quality evidence is still available for some relevant clinical questions, so future research has the potential to reduce uncertainty about the effects of intervention and the reasons for doing so at a reasonable cost.

A retrospective review of the community medicine needs from osteoporosis services in Canada

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive, real-world osteoporosis care has many facets not explicitly addressed in practice guidelines. We sought to determine the areas of knowledge and practice needs in osteoporosis medicine for the purpose of developing an osteoporosis curriculum for specialist trainees and knowledge translation tools for primary care.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of referral questions received from primary care and specialists to an academic, multi-disciplinary tertiary osteoporosis and metabolic bone clinic. There were 400 referrals in each of 5 years (2015-2019) selected randomly for review. The primary referral question was elucidated and assigned to one of 16 pre-determined referral topics reflecting questions in the care of osteoporosis and metabolic bone patients. The top 7 referral topics by frequency were determined while recording the referral source.

RESULTS

The majority of referrals (71%) came from urban primary care. The most common specialists to request care included rheumatology, oncology, gastroenterology and orthopedic surgery (fracture liaison services). Primary care referrals predominantly requested assistance with routine osteoporosis assessments, bisphosphonate holidays, bisphosphonate adverse effects/alternatives, fractures occurring despite therapy and adverse changes on bone densitometry despite treatment. Specialists most often referred patients with complex secondary bone diseases or cancer. The main study limitation was that knowledge needs of referring physicians were inferred from the referral question rather than tested directly.

CONCLUSION

By assessing actual community demand for services, this study identified several such topics that may be useful targets to develop high quality knowledge translation tools and curriculum design in programs training specialists in osteoporosis care.

What is the Role of Coordinators in the Secondary Fracture Prevention Program?

Background

The purpose of this study is to search for reports on the clinical effectiveness of FLS being implemented worldwide through the systematic review, analyze the roles of coordinators in each study, and provide basic data for the development of future coordinator education programs.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature using the Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Library was conducted for using the following keywords: ‘osteoporosis’ AND ‘fractures’ AND ’secondary prevention’. Finally, 65 studies are included in this study.

Results

At the coordinator-based fracture liaison service (FLS) center, the coordinator (often a nurse) acts as a central player in the establishing of patient connections, orthopedic surgeons, radiologists, and attending physicians. Coordinators help bridge the nursing gap by supporting identification, investigation, initiation of treatment, and patient follow-up. Medics has opened the way to effectively manage patients at high risk of developing another fracture. In addition, nurses are in a unique and important role as nurses responsible for enhancing their daily lives by building relationships with patients and families.

Conclusions

The coordinator in the FLS program plays an important role in the multidisciplinary management of vulnerable fractures, as well as in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis and in maintaining continuity of treatment. In the future, the broader role of coordinators should be systematically organized and developed into accredited educational programs.

Implementation of a fracture liaison service and its effects on osteoporosis treatment adherence and secondary fracture at a tertiary care academic health system

In this retrospective study, approximately 77% of patients who attended their osteoporosis clinic follow-up appointments following a fragility fracture were started on medical treatment. Approximately 82% of those patients were adherent with their treatment, and 1% of patients sustained a secondary fragility fracture while on treatment.

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of implementation of a fracture liaison service at a tertiary care academic medical center on osteoporosis treatment adherence and secondary fracture rates.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed over 6000 patients age 50 years or greater during a 5-year time period (2013-2018). Patients were identified as having a fragility fracture on presentation to the emergency department at the Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center and referred to our osteoporosis clinic using the electronic medical record. Data were collected regarding those patients who were recommended treatment, started treatment, maintained adherent to treatment, and those who sustained a secondary fracture.

RESULTS

6178 patients were identified as having a fragility fracture and referred to the osteoporosis clinic. 2631 of these patients successfully had a scheduled outpatient appointment at the osteoporosis clinic, of which 1937 attended their initial appointment and 1840 of these patients were prescribed treatment. Of the 1840 patients who were initially prescribed medication, 1416 (76.96%) initiated their treatment, and 1156 (81.64%) remained adherent to treatment. Fifteen patients (1.05%) on treatment sustained a secondary fracture after initiation of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a fracture liaison service at a tertiary care academic medical center is feasible and is associated with high rates of treatment implementation/adherence and low incidence of secondary fracture.

Identifying characteristics of an effective fracture liaison service: systematic literature review

Fracture liaison services (FLS) have been demonstrated to improve outcomes following osteoporotic fracture. The aim of this systematic literature review (SLR) was to determine the characteristics of an FLS that lead to improved patient outcomes. We conducted a SLR, including articles published between 2000 and February 2017, using global (Medline, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library) and local databases. Studies including patients aged ≥ 50 years with osteoporotic fractures enrolled in an FLS were assessed. Information extracted from each article included key person coordinating the FLS (physician, nurse or other healthcare professional), setting (hospital vs community), intensity (single vs multiple), duration (long vs short term), fracture type and gender. A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted based on the key person coordinating the FLS. Out of 7236 articles, 57 were considered to be high quality and identified for further analysis. The SLR identified several components which contributed to FLS success, including multidisciplinary involvement, driven by a dedicated case manager, regular assessment and follow-up, multifaceted interventions and patient education. Meta-analytic data confirm the effectiveness of an FLS following an osteoporotic fracture: approximate 27% increase in the likelihood of BMD testing and up to 21% increase in the likelihood of treatment initiation compared with usual care. The balance of evidence indicates that the multifaceted FLS and dedicated coordination are important success factors that contribute to effective FLS interventions which reduce fracture-related morbidity and mortality.

Orthopedic surgeons' attitudes to osteoporosis investigation and management after minimal trauma fracture (MTF)

A study of orthopedic surgeons in rural and regional Southeast Australia to determine attitudes to investigation and management of osteoporosis found they believe follow-up in regard to osteoporosis after MTF is important; responsibility for follow-up diagnosis and management lies with primary health care and current communication systems are poor.

PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION

The investigation and treatment of osteoporosis after minimal trauma fracture (MTF) is regarded as sub-optimal. There is strong evidence of the benefit of identifying and treating osteoporosis after MTF, and there has been discussion of the possible role that orthopedic surgeons might play in the management of osteoporosis after MTF. The study surveyed orthopedic surgeons in rural and regional Southeast Australia to determine their attitudes to investigation and management of osteoporosis, the role health professionals should play, and the communication and co-ordination of follow-up care.

METHODS

A survey was developed and piloted prior to being posted to 69 orthopedic surgeons asking for their opinions about the general management of osteoporosis, and the roles and responsibilities of health professionals in dealing with osteoporosis following an MTF.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 42 participants (60.8%) with the majority of respondents agreeing that it is important to treat osteoporosis following MTF. Less than 15% of respondents felt that it was their responsibility to initiate discussion or treatment or investigation after MTF. No respondent felt that the coordination of osteoporosis care was good and 45% stated it was poor. Communication after discharge is mostly left to the hospital (30%), while 20% stated they did not follow up at all.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that many rural orthopedic surgeons believe that follow-up in regard to osteoporosis after MTF is important, that responsibility for follow-up diagnosis and management of osteoporosis lies with primary health care and the current communication systems are poor.

Establishing a hospital based fracture liaison service to prevent secondary insufficiency fractures

In the aging population worldwide, osteoporosis is a relatively common condition and a major cause of long-term morbidity. Initial fragility fractures can lead to subsequent fractures. After a vertebral fracture, the risk of any another fracture increases 200% and that of a subsequent hip fracture increases 300%. For starting a hospital based Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) program, the nucleus is based on a physician champion, a FLS coordinator, and a nurse manager. A Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is a multidisciplinary system approach to reducing subsequent fracture risk in patients with a recent fragility fracture due to compromised bone health by identifying them at or close to the time when they are treated at the hospital for fracture and providing them with easy access to osteoporosis care. It has been shown that when compared to other models such as referral letters to primary care physicians or endocrinologists, the FLS model results in a higher rate of diagnosis and treatment with less attrition in the posffracture phase. Insufficiency fracture care requires more than surgery to stabilize a fractured bone. The FLS program provides an opportunity to treat osteoporosis from a public health perspective rather than leaving this to the whims of individual physicians. This is achieved by providing a seamless integration of care by health care providers, nursing staff and administration. The FLS can be adapted to any model of care including academic health systems. FLS provides a holistic approach to identify patients as well as to provide evidence-based interventions to prevent subsequent fractures. The long term goal is that internationally FLS will result in in decreased fracture-related morbidity, mortality and overall health care expenditure.

Osteoporosis knowledge translation for young adults: new directions for prevention programs

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis prevention is heavily reliant on education programs, which are most effective when tailored to their intended audience. Most osteoporosis prevention education is designed for older adults, making application of these programs to younger adults difficult. Designing programs for young adults requires understanding the information-seeking practices of young adults, so that knowledge about osteoporosis can be effectively translated.

METHODS

Individual interviews were conducted with 60 men and women-multiethnic, Canadian young adults-to explore both the sources and types of information they search for when seeking information on nutrition or bone health.

RESULTS

The results of this study raised themes related to the sources participants use, to their interests and to ways of engaging young adults. Prevention programs should make use of traditional sources, such as peers, family members and medical professionals, as well as emerging technologies, such as social media. Choice of sources was related to the perceived authority of and trust associated with the source. Messaging should relate to young adult interests, such as fitness and food-topics on which young adults are already seeking information-rather than being embedded within specific osteoporosis awareness materials. Engaging young adults means using relatable messages that are short and encourage small changes. Small gender-based differences were found in the information-seeking interests of participants. Differences related to age were not examined.

CONCLUSION

Creating short, action-oriented messages that are designed to encourage small changes in behaviour and are packaged with information that young adults are actively seeking is more likely to result in active engagement in prevention behaviours.

Establishing a fracture liaison service: an orthopaedic approach

➤ Bone health evaluations should be incorporated into care pathways for fragility fractures in all patients who are fifty years of age or older.➤ A fracture liaison service (FLS) is an established and proven method to achieve recommended standards of care for fragility fractures, including intervention for osteoporosis, secondary fracture prevention, and bone health evaluation.➤ The FLS facilitates patient care by automatically including all patients with a fragility fracture within a health-care system to provide them with the intervention that they need and to prevent avoidable fracture-related complications or readmissions.➤ An FLS functions with three key personnel: the FLS coordinator (usually an advanced practice provider), a physician champion (usually an orthopaedic surgeon), and a nurse navigator.

Patient perceptions of provider barriers to post-fracture secondary prevention

We examined patients' experiences regarding bone mineral density (BMD) testing and bone health treatment after being screened through Ontario's Fracture Clinic Screening Program. Provider-level barriers to testing and treatment appeared to be as significant as patient-level barriers and potentially had more of an impact on treatment than on testing.

INTRODUCTION

Post-fracture secondary prevention programs have had modest effects on bone densitometry rates and osteoporosis (OP) treatment initiation. Few studies have examined in depth the reasons that patients choose to seek or avoid investigation and treatment after screening through such a program. Our purpose was to examine patients' experiences regarding bone mineral density (BMD) testing and bone health treatment after screening through Ontario's Fracture Clinic Screening Program (FCSP).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective qualitative study in fragility fracture patients screened through one site of the FCSP. Eligible patients not on antiresorptive medication at the time of fracture were assessed by an osteoporosis screening coordinator and advised to follow up with their primary care physician for a BMD test and appropriate treatment. Participants were interviewed within 6, and within 18, months of their clinic visit. Fracture risk was assessed by the study team. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed by two researchers.

RESULTS

We conducted 51 interviews with 25 patients (22 females, 3 males) aged 50-79 years old, of whom 8 were deemed high risk for future fracture. Eighteen participants had a BMD test between baseline and follow-up and three reported receiving a prescription for pharmacotherapy. We categorized 21 participants as experiencing at least one barrier to BMD testing and appropriate treatment including health care providers telling participants that the fracture was not a fragility fracture, using participants' appearance/demographic information and X-rays to judge bone density, telling participants that a BMD test was not appropriate, failing to discuss fracture risk status, and giving unclear or incorrect information about treatment.

CONCLUSION

We identified modifiable barriers to post-fracture secondary prevention from the patient's perspective. Provider-level barriers appeare to be as significant as patient-level barriers and potentially had more of an impact on treatment than on BMD testing.

Clinical efficacy of a fragility care program in distal radius fracture patients

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of an initiative to improve the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in patients over 50 years of age with distal radius fractures (DRF).

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to determine the baseline percentage of individuals undergoing osteoporosis screening after DRF. Thereafter, a study was implemented in which DRF patients who were not being treated for osteoporosis or had not recently undergone screening were offered a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scan and referral to endocrinology at the initial hand surgery clinic visit. Patients who declined participation were contacted by a patient educator to discuss the benefits of screening and address their concerns. Those who then wanted to receive an osteoporosis evaluation were scheduled for bone scanning and endocrinology consultation.

RESULTS

During the baseline period, 7 patients (15%) were screened, and 41 (85%) were not screened. During the active phase of the initiative, 82 patients over 50 years of age were treated for a DRF at our institution. A total of 44 patients were identified for potential osteoporosis screening, and 35 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 (54%) agreed to screening after the initial orthopedic evaluation, and 16 declined. After speaking to a patient educator, 9 of these 16 patients agreed to screening. Of the remaining 7 patients, 4 again declined screening and 3 were unavailable by telephone. Overall, 80% of patients who were identified in the initiative agreed to osteoporosis screening after the combination of recommendation during hand surgery clinic visit and patient education by telephone, and 64% were diagnosed with osteoporosis/osteopenia as a result of completing screening.

CONCLUSIONS

An integrated model of care among orthopedic surgeons, patient educators, and endocrinologists substantially increased screening for osteoporosis after DRF.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

Secondary prevention after an osteoporosis-related fracture: an overview

This article is an overview of the status of postfracture secondary prevention programs. The concept of fracture risk, the inclusion of fracture risk in clinical practice guidelines for osteoporosis, and how fracture risk has contributed to the development of postfracture secondary prevention programs are described. The scope of postfracture secondary prevention programs, the gaps in care that persist despite these initiatives, and the potential reasons for these gaps are also described. Recommendations for future research in the area of postfracture secondary prevention are provided.

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.

Partnership for fragility bone fracture care provision and prevention program (P4Bones): study protocol for a secondary fracture prevention pragmatic controlled trial

Background

Fractures associated with bone fragility in older adults signal the potential for secondary fracture. Fragility fractures often precipitate further decline in health and loss of mobility, with high associated costs for patients, families, society and the healthcare system. Promptly initiating a coordinated, comprehensive pharmacological bone health and falls prevention program post-fracture may improve osteoporosis treatment compliance; and reduce rates of falls and secondary fractures, and associated morbidity, mortality and costs.

Methods/design

This pragmatic, controlled trial at 11 hospital sites in eight regions in Quebec, Canada, will recruit community-dwelling patients over age 50 who have sustained a fragility fracture to an intervention coordinated program or to standard care, according to the site. Site study coordinators will identify and recruit 1,596 participants for each study arm. Coordinators at intervention sites will facilitate continuity of care for bone health, and arrange fall prevention programs including physical exercise. The intervention teams include medical bone specialists, primary care physicians, pharmacists, nurses, rehabilitation clinicians, and community program organizers.

The primary outcome of this study is the incidence of secondary fragility fractures within an 18-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include initiation and compliance with bone health medication; time to first fall and number of clinically significant falls; fall-related hospitalization and mortality; physical activity; quality of life; fragility fracture-related costs; admission to a long term care facility; participants’ perceptions of care integration, expectations and satisfaction with the program; and participants’ compliance with the fall prevention program. Finally, professionals at intervention sites will participate in focus groups to identify barriers and facilitating factors for the integrated fragility fracture prevention program.

This integrated program will facilitate knowledge translation and dissemination via the following: involvement of various collaborators during the development and set-up of the integrated program; distribution of pamphlets about osteoporosis and fall prevention strategies to primary care physicians in the intervention group and patients in the control group; participation in evaluation activities; and eventual dissemination of study results.

Study/trial registration

Clinical Trial.Gov NCT01745068

Study ID number

CIHR grant # 267395

Patient perceptions of the path to osteoporosis care following a fragility fracture

Coordinator-based osteoporosis (OP) screening programs for fragility-fracture patients in orthopedic environments improve rates of OP testing and care, but there are still gaps in care. The purpose of this study was to understand the process by which patients decided whether to proceed with OP testing or care within these programs. Twenty-four fragility-fracture patients in the OP screening program at a large, urban, university hospital in Canada participated in one of five focus groups. Focus group transcripts were sorted and coded. Links between themes were developed to generate a description of the process leading to successful initiation of OP care after a fragility fracture. To initiate OP testing and care, patients had to both comprehend the link between their fragility fracture and OP, and make an action-oriented appraisal of what action to take. Several modifiable facilitators and barriers influenced the process between screening and undergoing OP testing and initiating treatment.

Pharmaceutical care issues encountered by post-menopausal osteoporotic women prescribed bisphosphonates

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Pharmacists have been involved in providing comprehensive interventions to osteoporosis patients, but pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) encountered during such interventions have not been well documented. Therefore, the aim of this study was to document PCIs encountered by post-menopausal osteoporotic women prescribed bisphosphonates.

METHODS

A randomized controlled study was conducted from September 2005-February 2009 in the University Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. This main intervention study measured the effects of pharmaceutical care on medication adherence, persistence, quality of life, knowledge and patient satisfaction. However, this manuscript is part of the main intervention study and focuses only on the PCIs encountered.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

post-menopausal women diagnosed with osteoporosis (T-score≤-2·5/low-trauma fracture) and prescribed weekly alendronate/risedronate.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

those with metabolic bone disease and could not communicate in English. The PCIs identified were collected via personal interviews or telephone calls, and each participant was followed-up for a period of 2 years. All PCIs were discussed with and confirmed by a physician.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of the 198 participants recruited, 64 (32·3%) experienced adverse effects because of bisphosphonates whereas one participant (0·5%) refused to start bisphosphonates because of fear of adverse effects. Most adverse effects [50 (74·6%)] were reported during the first 3 months of therapy with gastrointestinal problems being the main issue [23 (11·6%)]. Of the nine participants (4·5%) who discontinued bisphosphonates, only three agreed to take another medication. From the 97 PCIs identified, 77 issues could be classified as drug-related problems [according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe Classification v6·2]. There were 87 causes, 178 interventions and 77 outcomes. The main problem and cause of the PCIs encountered were adverse drug events (83·1% and 74·7% respectively), whereas the main intervention provided was patient counselling (41·0%). All problems were solved (98·5%) except for one because of the lack of cooperation of a patient. After 2 years, 36 participants (20%) were no longer persistent with therapy, 19 (10·6%) did not have clinic follow-up and 53 (26·8%) did not have a bone mineral density scan.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The main PCIs identified were related to the use of bisphosphonates and its adverse effects. The study showed that the presence of a clinical pharmacist has enabled patients to voice their medication-related issues and to allow appropriate recommendations and actions to be taken to resolve these issues.

Impact of a centralized osteoporosis coordinator on post-fracture osteoporosis management: a cluster randomized trial

We conducted a cluster randomized trial evaluating the effect of a centralized coordinator who identifies and follows up with fracture patients and their primary care physicians about osteoporosis. Compared with controls, intervention patients were five times more likely to receive BMD testing and two times more likely to receive appropriate management.

INTRODUCTION

To determine if a centralized coordinator who follows up with fracture patients and their primary care physicians by telephone and mail (intervention) will increase the proportion of patients who receive appropriate post-fracture osteoporosis management, compared to simple fall prevention advice (attention control).

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in small community hospitals in the province of Ontario, Canada. Hospitals that treated between 60 and 340 fracture patients per year were eligible. Patients 40 years and older presenting with a low trauma fracture were identified from Emergency Department records and enrolled in the trial. The primary outcome was 'appropriate' management, defined as a normal bone mineral density (BMD) test or taking osteoporosis medications.

RESULTS

Thirty-six hospitals were randomized to either intervention or control and 130 intervention and 137 control subjects completed the study. The mean age of participants was 65 ± 12 years and 69% were female. The intervention increased the proportion of patients who received appropriate management within 6 months of fracture; 45% in the intervention group compared with 26% in the control group (absolute difference of 19%; adjusted OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3-4.1). The proportion who had a BMD test scheduled or performed was much higher with 57% of intervention patients compared with 21% of controls (absolute difference of 36%; adjusted OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 3.0-7.0).

CONCLUSIONS

A centralized osteoporosis coordinator is effective in improving the quality of osteoporosis care in smaller communities that do not have on-site coordinators or direct access to osteoporosis specialists.

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.

The impact of two educational interventions on osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment after fragility fracture: a population-based randomized controlled trial

This study assessed whether osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment after an osteoporotic fracture can be increased by providing osteoporosis reading material to patients and family doctors or by watching a videocassette about osteoporosis. Educating patients about osteoporosis had little impact on whether a woman received an osteoporosis diagnosis or treatment.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of two education-based interventions on osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment in women ≥ 50 years of age after fragility fracture.

METHODS

Six to eight months after fracture, women were randomized into three groups: (1) control, (2) written materials, or (3) videocassette and written materials. Written materials for both the patient and physician detailed osteoporosis, fragility fracture, and available treatments; written materials for physicians were provided through patients. The educational videocassette presented similar information as the written material, but in greater depth. Rates of osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment following intervention were compared among groups using survival analysis methods. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.0167.

RESULTS

At randomization, 1,174 women were without osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment, and after follow-up, 12% of the control group, 15% of the written materials group (p = 0.073), and 16% (p = 0.036) of the videocassette and written materials group were diagnosed with osteoporosis (statistical comparisons to control). Treatment rates were 8% for the control group, 12% for the written materials group (p = 0.052), and 11% for the videocassette and written materials group (p = 0.157). At randomization, 1,314 women were without treatment and after follow-up therapy was initiated in 10% of the control group, 13% of the written materials group (p = 0.107), and 13% of the videocassette and written materials group (p = 0.238).

CONCLUSIONS

The educational interventions assessed in this trial were not satisfactory to increase osteoporosis diagnosis or treatment in recently fractured women to a clinically meaningful degree.

Bone quality: educational tools for patients, physicians, and educators

BACKGROUND

Defining bone quality remains elusive. From a patient perspective bone quality can best be defined as an individual's likelihood of sustaining a fracture. Fracture risk indicators and performance measures can help clinicians better understand individual fracture risk. Educational resources such as the Web can help clinicians and patients better understand fracture risk, communicate effectively, and make decisions concerning diagnosis and treatment.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We examined four questions: What tools can be used to identify individuals at high risk for fracture? What clinical performance measures are available? What strategies can help ensure that patients at risk for fracture are identified? What are some authoritative Web sites for educating providers and patients about bone quality?

METHODS

Using Google, PUBMED, and trademark names, we reviewed the literature using the terms "bone quality" and "osteoporosis education." Web site legitimacy was evaluated using specific criteria. Educational Web sites were limited to English-language sites sponsored by nonprofit organizations

RESULTS

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool® (FRAX®) and the Fracture Risk Calculator (FRC) are reliable means of assessing fracture risk. Performance measures relating to bone health were developed by the AMA convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® and are included in the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative. In addition, quality measures have been developed by the Joint Commission. Strategies for identifying individuals at risk include designating responsibility for case finding and intervention, evaluating secondary causes of osteoporosis, educating patients and providers, performing cost-effectiveness evaluation, and using information technology. An abundance of authoritative educational Web sites exists for providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective clinical indicators, performance measures, and educational tools to better understand and identify fracture risk are now available. The next challenge is to encourage broader use of these resources so that individuals at high risk for fracture will not just be identified but will also adhere to therapy.

Coordinator-based systems for secondary prevention in fragility fracture patients

The underlying causes of incident fractures--bone fragility and the tendency to fall--remain under-diagnosed and under-treated. This care gap in secondary prevention must be addressed to minimise both the debilitating consequences of subsequent fractures for patients and the associated economic burden to healthcare systems. Clinical systems aimed at ensuring appropriate management of patients following fracture have been developed around the world. A systematic review of the literature showed that 65% of systems reported include a dedicated coordinator who acts as the link between the orthopaedic team, the osteoporosis and falls services, the patient and the primary care physician. Coordinator-based systems facilitate bone mineral density testing, osteoporosis education and care in patients following a fragility fracture and have been shown to be cost-saving. Other success factors included a fracture registry and a database to monitor the care provided to the fracture patient. Implementation of such a system requires an audit of existing arrangements, creation of a network of healthcare professionals with clearly defined roles and the identification of a 'medical champion' to lead the project. A business case is needed to acquire the necessary funding. Incremental, achievable targets should be identified. Clinical pathways should be supported by evidence-based recommendations from national or regional guidelines. Endorsement of the proposed model within national healthcare policies and advocacy programmes can achieve alignment of the objectives of policy makers, professionals and patients. Successful transformation of care relies upon consensus amongst all participants in the multi-disciplinary team that cares for fragility fracture patients.

Effects of pharmaceutical care on adherence and persistence to bisphosphonates in postmenopausal osteoporotic women

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Studies have shown that comprehensive interventions by pharmacists can improve adherence and persistence to osteoporosis therapy, but the association between adherence and bone turnover markers (BTMs) has never been studied. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of pharmaceutical care on medication adherence (and its effects on BTMs), as well as persistence of postmenopausal osteoporotic women to prescribed bisphosphonates.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted from 2005 to 2009 in the University Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

postmenopausal osteoporotic women diagnosed with osteoporosis with a T-score ≤ -2·5 or who had a low-trauma fracture and prescribed weekly alendronate/risedronate. Intervention participants received counselling on osteoporosis, risk factors, lifestyle modifications, goals of therapy, side effects and the importance of adherence. Adherence was assessed at months 3, 6 and 12, and persistence at month 12. Feedback on BTMs was provided at months 4 and 7. The control group received no counselling. Two BTMs were used: serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX-I) and serum osteocalcin (OC).

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED

medication adherence, BTMs and persistence.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Intervention participants who received pharmaceutical care reported significantly higher medication adherence at 6 (P = 0·015) and 12 months (P = 0·047) compared with the control group; but this effect was not shown by the BTMs. This is probably due to the long effect of bisphosphonates in bone. A significant difference was found between serum CTX-I and OC in identifying non-responders to anti-resorptive therapy (P < 0·001), indicating the usefulness of BTMs as an objective marker. However, pharmaceutical care did not affect persistence to osteoporosis therapy within a 1-year period [log rank (Mantel-Cox) χ² = 0·496, P = 0·481]. The proportion of participants who were persistent with bisphosphonate therapy after 12 months was 89·8% and 87·0% in the control and intervention group respectively.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The provision of pharmaceutical care improved medication adherence but not persistence. BTMs were not appropriate objective measures for assessing adherence to weekly bisphosphonates but were useful for identifying non-responders to treatment within 3-6 months, much earlier than using bone mineral density. The study indicates that pharmacists have a role in improving medication adherence, but its long-term effect on persistence warrants further studies with longer duration.

The Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy: implementation of a population-based osteoporosis action plan in Canada

In the last decade, there have been a number of action plans published to highlight the importance of preventing osteoporosis and related fractures. In the province of Ontario Canada, the Ministry of Health provided funding for the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy. The goal is to reduce morbidity, mortality, and costs from osteoporosis and related fractures through an integrated and comprehensive approach aimed at health promotion and disease management. This paper describes the components of the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy and progress on implementation efforts as of March 2009. There are five main components: health promotion; bone mineral density testing, access, and quality; postfracture care; professional education; and research and evaluation. Responsibility for implementation of the initiatives within the components is shared across a number of professional and patient organizations and academic teaching hospitals with osteoporosis researchers. The lessons learned from each phase of the development, implementation, and evaluation of the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy provides a tremendous opportunity to inform other jurisdictions embarking on implementing similar large-scale bone health initiatives.

[Economic concepts for measuring the costs of illness of osteoporosis: an international comparison]

Worldwide osteoporosis is underestimated and despite availability of effective and cost effective treatments, these are often not implemented. Apart from a demographically driven increase in disease cases, failure to implement or tardy implementation of preventive measures as well as poor treatment compliance leads to a deterioration of the health economic outcomes. This in turn causes considerable costs to the health care system and to society, through ineffective intake of medication, diminished quality of life and inability to work as well as substantial costs of rehabilitation of patients. Health economic analyses and methods are increasingly used by decision makers to set priorities and evaluate alternative treatment measures about their cost-effectiveness. In order to be able to capture the costs of illness incurred by osteoporosis, different diseases specific models and methods have been developed, such as the reference model of the IOF, an osteoporosis-specific Markov model or internationally comparable intervention thresholds. Health economists estimate that osteoporosis-related costs will double by 2050 in both Europe and the individual countries. For Europe this means an increase from 40 billion Euro in 2000 to almost 80 billion Euro in 2050. In Austria, an aggregation of the different costs of osteoporosis is not possible, due to a lack of comparability and availability of data. The international ICUROS study and the Austrian Osteoporosis Report 2007 are the first steps towards counteracting this situation.