Geisinger high-risk osteoporosis clinic (HiROC): 2013-2015 FLS performance analysis

Examining treatment targets and equity in bone-active medication use within secondary fracture prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review seeks to evaluate the proportion of fragility fracture patients screened in secondary fracture prevention programs who were indicated for pharmacological treatment, received prescriptions for bone-active medications, and initiated the prescribed medication. Additionally, the study aims to analyze equity in pharmacological treatment by examining equity-related variables including age, sex, gender, race, education, income, and geographic location.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to ascertain the proportion of fragility fracture patients indicated for treatment who received prescriptions and/or initiated bone-active medication through secondary fracture prevention programs. We also examined treatment indications reported in studies and eligibility criteria to confirm patients who were eligible for treatment. To compute the pooled proportions for medication prescription and initiation, we carried out a single group proportional meta-analysis. We also extracted the proportions of patients who received a prescription and/or began treatment based on age, sex, race, education, socioeconomic status, location, and chronic conditions.

RESULTS

This review included 122 studies covering 114 programs. The pooled prescription rate was 77%, and the estimated medication initiation rate was 71%. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in treatment initiation between the Fracture Liaison Service and other programs. Across all studies, age, sex, and socioeconomic status were the only equity variables reported in relation to treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review emphasizes the need for standardized reporting guidelines in post-fracture interventions. Moreover, considering equity stratifiers in the analysis of health outcomes will help address inequities and improve the overall quality and reach of secondary fracture prevention programs.

A patient-level key performance indicator set to measure the effectiveness of fracture liaison services and guide quality improvement: a position paper of the IOF Capture the Fracture Working Group, National Osteoporosis Foundation and Fragility Fracture Network

The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) Capture the Fracture® Campaign with the Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) and National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) has developed eleven patient-level key performance indicators (KPIs) for fracture liaison services (FLSs) to guide quality improvement.

INTRODUCTION

Fracture Liaison Services (FLSs) are recommended worldwide to reduce fracture risk after a sentinel fracture. Given not every FLS is automatically effective, the IOF Capture the Fracture working group has developed and implemented the Best Practice Framework to assess the organisational components of an FLS. We have now developed a complimentary KPI set that extends this assessment of performance to the patient level.

METHODS

The Capture the Fracture working group in collaboration with the Fragility Fracture Network Secondary Fragility Fracture Special Interest Group and National Osteoporosis Foundation adapted existing metrics from the UK-based Fracture Liaison Service Database Audit to develop a patient-level KPI set for FLSs.

RESULTS

Eleven KPIs were selected. The proportion of patients: with non-spinal fractures; with spine fractures (detected clinically and radiologically); assessed for fracture risk within 12 weeks of sentinel fracture; having DXA assessment within 12 weeks of sentinel fracture; having falls risk assessment; recommended anti-osteoporosis medication; commenced of strength and balance exercise intervention within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; monitored within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; started anti-osteoporosis medication within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; prescribed anti-osteoporosis medication 52 weeks after sentinel fracture. The final KPI measures data completeness for each of the other KPIs. For these indicators, levels of achievement were set at the < 50%, 50-80% and > 80% levels except for treatment recommendation where a level of 50% was used.

CONCLUSION

This KPI set compliments the existing Best Practice Framework to support FLSs to examine their own performance using patient-level data. By using this KPI set for local quality improvement cycles, FLSs will be able to efficiently realise the full potential of secondary fracture prevention and improved clinical outcomes for their local populations.

Bisphosphonate utilization across the spectrum of eGFR

Bisphosphonates are the most common treatment for osteoporosis but there are concerns regarding its use in CKD. We evaluated the frequency of BSP by eGFR categories among patients with osteoporosis from two healthcare systems. Our results show that 56% of patients were treated, with reduced odds in those with lower eGFR.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Bisphosphonates (BSP) are the most common treatment but there are concerns regarding its efficacy and toxicity in CKD. We evaluated the frequency of BSP use by level of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

We assessed BSP use in patients with incident osteoporosis from the SCREAM-Cohort, Stockholm-Sweden, and Geisinger Healthcare, PA, USA. Osteoporosis was defined as the first encountered ICD diagnosis, and BSP use was defined as the dispensation or prescription of any BSP from 6 months prior to 3 years after the diagnosis. Multinomial logistic regression was used to account for the competing risk of death.

RESULTS

A total of 15,719 women and 3011 men in SCREAM and 17,325 women and 3568 men in Geisinger with incident osteoporosis were included. Overall, 56% of individuals used BSP in both studies, with a higher proportion in women. After adjustments, the odds of BSP was lower across lower eGFR in SCREAM, ranging from 0.90 (0.81-0.99) for eGFR 75-89 mL/min/1.73m² to 0.56 (0.46-0.68) for eGFR 30-44 mL/min/1.73m² in women and from 0.72 (0.54-0.97) for eGFR of 60-74 to 0.42 (0.25-0.70) for eGFR 30-44 mL/min/1.73m² in men. In Geisinger, odds were lower for eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73m² in both sexes and the frequency of BSP use dropped over time.

CONCLUSION

In the two healthcare systems, approximately half of the people diagnosed with osteoporosis received BSP. Practices of prescription in relation to eGFR varied, but those with lower eGFR were less likely to receive BSP.

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations from a Multistakeholder Coalition

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fractureamong people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, andsubcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficaciousandcanreduce risk of future fracture.Patientsneededucation,however, about thebenefitsandrisks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive butmay be beneficial for selected patients at high risk.Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the earlypost-fractureperiod,prompt treatment is recommended.Adequate dietary or supplemental vitaminDand calciumintake shouldbe assured. Individuals beingtreatedfor osteoporosis shouldbe reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, includingvia patienteducationabout osteoporosisandfracturesandmonitoringfor adverse treatment effects.Patients shouldbestronglyencouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol inmoderation atmost, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease).

Incorporation of a patient navigator into a secondary fracture prevention program identifies barriers to patient care

INTRODUCTION

Patient navigation improves outcomes in various clinical contexts, but has not been evaluated in secondary fracture prevention.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed charts of patients, age 50 + from April to October, 2016 hospitalized with fragility fracture contacted by a patient navigator. Patients were identified using an electronic tool extracting data from electronic medical records which alerted the patient navigator to contact patients by phone post-discharge to schedule appointments to "High-Risk Osteoporosis Clinic" (HiROC) and Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) scan. Primary outcome was transition from hospital to HiROC. We also compared completion of DXA, five osteoporosis-associated in-hospital laboratory tests (calcium, 25-hydroxy vitamin D, complete blood count, renal, and liver function), osteoporosis medication prescription and adherence, and other patient characteristics to historical controls (2014-2015) without patient navigation. Comparisons were made using Chi-square, Fisher's Exact, two-sample t test or Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, as appropriate.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients transitioning to HiROC with and without patient navigation was not different (53% vs. 48%, p = 0.483), but DXA scan completion was higher (90% vs. 67%, p = 0.006). No difference in medication initiation within 3 months post discharge (73% vs. 65%, p = 0.387) or adherence at 6 months (68% vs. 71%, p = 0.777) was found. Patients attending HiROC lived closer (11 vs. 43 miles, p < 0.001) and more likely to follow-up in surgery clinic (95% vs. 61%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation did not improve transition to HiROC. Longer travel distance may be a barrier-unaffected by patient navigation. Identifying barriers may inform best practices for Fracture Liaison Service programs.

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations from a Multistakeholder Coalition

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early post-fracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease). © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Quality Measures and Quality Improvement Initiatives in Osteoporosis-an Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aims of this review are to summarize current performance for osteoporosis quality measures used by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) for pay-for-performance programs and to describe recent quality improvement strategies around these measures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information (HEDIS) quality measures for the managed care population indicate gradual improvement in osteoporosis screening, osteoporosis identification and treatment following fragility fracture, and documentation of fall risk assessment and plan of care between 2006 and 2016. However, population-based studies suggest achievement for these process measures is lower where reporting is not mandated. Performance gaps remain, particularly for post-fracture care. Elderly patients with increased comorbidity are especially vulnerable to fractures, yet underperformance is documented in this population. Gender and racial disparities also exist. As has been shown for other areas of health care, education alone has a limited role as a quality improvement intervention. Multifactorial and systems-based interventions seem to be most successful in leading to measurable change for osteoporosis care and fall prevention. Despite increasing recognition of evidence-based quality measures for osteoporosis and incentives to improve upon performance for these measures, persistent gaps in care exist that will require further investigation into sustainable and value-adding quality improvement interventions.