1
|
Bullock L, Nicholls E, Cherrington A, Butler-Walley S, Clark EM, Fleming J, Leyland S, Bentley I, Thomas S, Iglesias-Urrutia CP, Webb D, Smith J, Bathers S, Lewis S, Clifford A, Siciliano M, Protheroe J, Ryan S, Lefroy J, Dale N, Hawarden A, Connacher S, Horne R, O'Neill TW, Mallen CD, Jinks C, Paskins Z. A person-centred consultation intervention to improve shared decision-making about, and uptake of, osteoporosis medicines (iFraP): a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial protocol. NIHR OPEN RESEARCH 2024; 4:14. [PMID: 39145101 PMCID: PMC11320037 DOI: 10.3310/nihropenres.13571.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/11/2024] [Indexed: 08/16/2024]
Abstract
Background Good quality shared decision-making (SDM) conversations involve people with, or at risk of osteoporosis and clinicians collaborating to decide, where appropriate, which evidence-based medicines best fit the person's life, beliefs, and values. We developed the improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) intervention comprising a computerised Decision Support Tool (DST), clinician training package and information resources, for use in UK Fracture Liaison Service consultations.Two primary objectives to determine (1) the effect of the iFraP intervention on patient-reported ease in decision-making about osteoporosis medicines, and (2) cost-effectiveness of iFraP intervention compared to usual NHS care. Secondary objectives are to determine the iFraP intervention effect on patient reported outcome and experience measures, clinical effectiveness (osteoporosis medicine adherence), and to explore intervention acceptability, mechanisms, and processes underlying observed effects, and intervention implementation. Methods The iFraP trial is a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial in patients referred to a Fracture Liaison Service, with nested mixed methods process evaluation and health economic analysis. Participants aged ≥50 years (n=380) are randomised (1:1 ratio) to one of two arms: (1) iFraP intervention (iFraP-i) or (2) comparator usual NHS care (iFraP-u) and are followed up at 2-weeks and 3-months. The primary outcome is ease of decision-making assessed 2 weeks after the consultation using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). The primary objectives will be addressed by comparing the mean DCS score in each trial arm (using analysis of covariance) for patients given an osteoporosis medicine recommendation, alongside a within-trial cost-effectiveness and value of information (VoI) analysis. Process evaluation data collection includes consultation recordings, semi-structured interviews, and DST analytics. Discussion The iFraP trial will answer important questions about the effectiveness of the new 'iFraP' osteoporosis DST, coupled with clinician training, on SDM and informed initiation of osteoporosis medicines. Trial registration ISRCTN 10606407, 21/11/2022 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN10606407.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laurna Bullock
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Elaine Nicholls
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Andrea Cherrington
- Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | | | - Emma M Clark
- Bristol Medical School, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Jane Fleming
- Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
- Addenbrooke’s Hospital Fracture Liaison Service, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Ida Bentley
- School of Medicine Research User Group, Keele University, Keele, England, UK
| | | | - Cynthia P Iglesias-Urrutia
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, England, UK
- Danish Centre for Healthcare Improvements (CHI), Aalborg University, Aalborg, North Denmark Region, Denmark
| | - David Webb
- Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Jo Smith
- Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Sarah Bathers
- Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Sarah Lewis
- Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Angela Clifford
- School of Nursing & Midwifery, Keele University, Keele, England, UK
| | - Michele Siciliano
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, England, UK
| | - Joanne Protheroe
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Sarah Ryan
- School of Nursing & Midwifery, Keele University, Keele, England, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke on Trent, UK
| | - Janet Lefroy
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Nicky Dale
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke on Trent, UK
| | - Ashley Hawarden
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke on Trent, UK
| | - Sarah Connacher
- Oxford Fracture Prevention & Osteoporosis Service, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundations Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Robert Horne
- Centre for Behavioural Medicine, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, England, UK
| | - Terence W O'Neill
- Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, The University of Manchester, Manchester, England, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Christian D Mallen
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Clare Jinks
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
| | - Zoe Paskins
- Centre for Musculoskeletal Health Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle under Lyme, England, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke on Trent, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rucinski K, Crecelius CR, Stucky R, Stannard JP, Cook JL. Integrated Care for Comprehensive Management of Patients with Osteoarthritis: Program Development and Implementation. J Knee Surg 2023; 36:1392-1398. [PMID: 37220783 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1768966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
Treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) is often complicated by comorbidities, which put patients at potentially higher risks following operative interventions. Management of these comorbidities is usually separate from orthopaedic care, with patients invited to return to their orthopaedic surgeon once surgical risk factors are better controlled. However, this practice can lead to disjointed care, resulting in uncertainty, mistrust, unmanaged pain, and dissatisfaction for patients. Integrated care teams provide an effective option for coordinated comprehensive nonoperative and preoperative management of patients with knee OA and medical comorbidities. The objective of this article is to summarize the process for implementation of an integrated program to manage patients with symptomatic knee OA and the initial outcomes at our institution as an example of the effects of integrated patient management in orthopaedics. At the author's institution, an integrated program was implemented, successfully addressing the unmet need for coordinated care for patients with bone and joint health problems and medical comorbidities. Patients who completed the full program experienced significant improvements in both pain and function. Potential applications for knee surgeons considering implementing integrated care models could include pre- and postoperative management programs, nonoperative management program, and programs seeking to meet key metrics such as improved readmission rates, patient satisfaction, or value-based care. For effective program implementation, careful planning with convenient referral mechanisms, leadership buy-in, and patient-centered communication protocols are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kylee Rucinski
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
- Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopedics, University of Missouri System, Columbia, Missouri
| | - Cory R Crecelius
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
| | - Renée Stucky
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
| | - James P Stannard
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
| | - James L Cook
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
- Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopedics, University of Missouri System, Columbia, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Singer AJ, Sharma A, Deignan C, Borgermans L. Closing the gap in osteoporosis management: the critical role of primary care in bone health. Curr Med Res Opin 2023; 39:387-398. [PMID: 36597741 DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2022.2141483] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The World Health Organization issued a call to action for primary care to lead efforts in managing noncommunicable diseases, including osteoporosis. Although common, osteoporosis remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Primary care practitioners (PCPs) are critical in identifying individuals at risk for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures; however, recent advances in assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis have not been incorporated into clinical practice in primary care due to numerous reasons including time constraints and insufficient knowledge. To close this gap in clinical practice, we believe PCPs need a practical strategy to facilitate osteoporosis assessment and management that is easy to implement. METHODS In this article, we consolidate information from various global guidelines and highlight areas of agreement to create a streamlined osteoporosis management strategy for a global audience of PCPs. RESULTS We present a systematic approach to facilitate osteoporosis assessment and management that includes four steps: (1) identifying patients at risk through proactive screening strategies, (2) investigating and diagnosing patients, (3) intervening with personalized treatment plans, and (4) implementing patient-centered strategies for long-term management and monitoring of patients. CONCLUSION Primary care has a central role in ensuring the incorporation of key elements of holistic care as outlined by the World Health Organization in managing noncommunicable diseases including osteoporosis; namely, a people-centered approach, incorporation of specialist services, and multidisciplinary care. This approach is designed to strengthen the health system's response to the growing osteoporosis epidemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea J Singer
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Cynthia Deignan
- Global Clinical Development, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
| | - Liesbeth Borgermans
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mahaisavariya C, Vanitcharoenkul E, Kitcharanant N, Chotiyarnwong P, Unnanuntana A. Exploring the osteoporosis treatment gap after fragility hip fracture at a Tertiary University Medical Center in Thailand. BMC Geriatr 2023; 23:70. [PMID: 36737708 PMCID: PMC9898992 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-03778-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/27/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND (1) To evaluate the prescription rate of anti-osteoporosis medication, and (2) to identify factors associated with patients not receiving anti-osteoporosis medication or, when prescribed, not persisting with medication 1 year after hip fracture treatment. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all fragility hip fracture patients admitted to the orthopedic unit of the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. We identified patients who did not receive anti-osteoporosis medication both 6 months and 1 year after fracture treatment. Patients who did not receive the medication 1 year after their treatment were enrolled and interviewed using a no-treatment questionnaire. RESULTS In total, 530 patients with fragility hip fractures were eligible (mean age, 79.0 years), and most (74.5%) were women. Only 148 patients (31.6%) received anti-osteoporosis medication 1 year after hip fracture. Logistic regression analysis identified predictors for not receiving the medication: male sex (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.1-3.0), Charlson comorbidity index score ≥ 5 (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0-2.3), and secondary school education or below (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.3). The main reason for not receiving the medication was that healthcare providers neither discussed nor initiated pharmacological treatment for osteoporosis (48.2%). When the medication was prescribed, non-persistence primarily stemmed from transportation difficulties that resulted in patients missing follow-ups (50.0%). CONCLUSIONS Improved physician attitudes toward anti-osteoporosis medications might enhance the treatment rate. Developing a follow-up team and facilitating access to medications (eg, courier delivery to patients) would promote therapy compliance. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS The protocol for the first phase and second phase was approved by the Siriraj Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand (COA no. Si 180/2021) and for the second phase, patients-informed consent forms used in the cross-sectional component were approved by the Siriraj Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand (COA no. Si 180/2021). The research was registered with the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR number: 20210824002). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Each patient (or a relative/caregiver) provided informed consent in writing or by telephone to participate in this second study phase.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chantas Mahaisavariya
- grid.10223.320000 0004 1937 0490Golden Jubilee Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Ekasame Vanitcharoenkul
- grid.10223.320000 0004 1937 0490Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700 Thailand
| | - Nitchanant Kitcharanant
- grid.7132.70000 0000 9039 7662Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
| | - Pojchong Chotiyarnwong
- grid.10223.320000 0004 1937 0490Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700 Thailand
| | - Aasis Unnanuntana
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Non-Adherence to Anti-Osteoporosis Medication: Factors Influencing and Strategies to Overcome It. A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2022; 12:jcm12010014. [PMID: 36614816 PMCID: PMC9821321 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12010014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2022] [Revised: 12/13/2022] [Accepted: 12/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
To evaluate the reasons for inadequate adherence to osteoporosis therapy and to describe the strategies for improving adherence to and persistence with regular medications, we conducted a review of the literature. The primary outcome of the study was the determination of the factors adverse to the onset and maintenance of anti-osteoporosis therapies. Secondly, we focused on studies whose efforts led to finding different strategies to improve adherence and persistence. We identified a total of 26 articles. The most recurrent and significant factors identified were aging, polypharmacy, and smoking habits. Different strategies to guide patients in their osteoporosis care have been identified, such as monitoring and follow-up via telephone calls, email, and promotional meetings, and proactive care interventions such as medication monitoring, post-fracture care programs, and decision aids. Changes in the drugs regimen and dispensation are strategies tried to lead to better adherence and persistence, but also improved satisfaction of patients undergoing anti-osteoporosis treatment. Patient involvement is an important factor to increase medication persistence while using a flexible drugs regimen.
Collapse
|
6
|
LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, Siris ES. The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2022; 33:2049-2102. [PMID: 35478046 PMCID: PMC9546973 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 279] [Impact Index Per Article: 139.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Osteoporosis is the most common metabolic bone disease in the USA and the world. It is a subclinical condition until complicated by fracture(s). These fractures place an enormous medical and personal burden on individuals who suffer from them and take a significant economic toll. Any new fracture in an adult aged 50 years or older signifies imminent elevated risk for subsequent fractures, particularly in the year following the initial fracture. What a patient perceives as an unfortunate accident may be seen as a sentinel event indicative of bone fragility and increased future fracture risk even when the result of considerable trauma. Clinical or subclinical vertebral fractures, the most common type of osteoporotic fractures, are associated with a 5-fold increased risk for additional vertebral fractures and a 2- to 3-fold increased risk for fractures at other sites. Untreated osteoporosis can lead to a vicious cycle of recurrent fracture(s), often resulting in disability and premature death. In appropriate patients, treatment with effective antifracture medication prevents fractures and improves outcomes. Primary care providers and medical specialists are critical gatekeepers who can identify fractures and initiate proven osteoporosis interventions. Osteoporosis detection, diagnosis, and treatment should be routine practice in all adult healthcare settings. The Bone Health and Osteoporosis Foundation (BHOF) - formerly the National Osteoporosis Foundation - first published the Clinician's Guide in 1999 to provide accurate information on osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Since that time, significant improvements have been made in diagnostic technologies and treatments for osteoporosis. Despite these advances, a disturbing gap persists in patient care. At-risk patients are often not screened to establish fracture probability and not educated about fracture prevention. Most concerning, the majority of highest risk women and men who have a fracture(s) are not diagnosed and do not receive effective, FDA-approved therapies. Even those prescribed appropriate therapy are unlikely to take the medication as prescribed. The Clinician's Guide offers concise recommendations regarding prevention, risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men aged 50 years and older. It includes indications for bone densitometry as well as fracture risk thresholds for pharmacologic intervention. Current medications build bone and/or decrease bone breakdown and dramatically reduce incident fractures. All antifracture therapeutics treat but do not cure the disease. Skeletal deterioration resumes sooner or later when a medication is discontinued-sooner for nonbisphosphonates and later for bisphosphonates. Even if normal BMD is achieved, osteoporosis and elevated risk for fracture are still present. The diagnosis of osteoporosis persists even if subsequent DXA T-scores are above - 2.5. Ongoing monitoring and strategic interventions will be necessary if fractures are to be avoided. In addition to pharmacotherapy, adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, avoidance of smoking and excessive alcohol intake, weight-bearing and resistance-training exercise, and fall prevention are included in the fracture prevention armamentarium. Where possible, recommendations in this guide are based on evidence from RCTs; however, relevant published data and guidance from expert clinical experience provides the basis for recommendations in those areas where RCT evidence is currently deficient or not applicable to the many osteoporosis patients not considered for RCT participation due to age and morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. S. LeBoff
- grid.38142.3c000000041936754XBrigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 221 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
| | - S. L. Greenspan
- grid.412689.00000 0001 0650 7433University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, 1110 Kaufmann Building, 3471 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
| | - K. L. Insogna
- grid.47100.320000000419368710Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
| | - E. M. Lewiecki
- grid.266832.b0000 0001 2188 8502University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, 300 Oak St NE, Albuquerque, NM 87106 USA
| | - K. G. Saag
- grid.265892.20000000106344187University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, FOT 820, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
| | - A. J. Singer
- grid.411663.70000 0000 8937 0972MedStar Georgetown University Hospital and Georgetown University Medical Center, 3800 Reservoir Road NW, 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20007 USA
| | - E. S. Siris
- grid.21729.3f0000000419368729Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 180 Fort Washington Ave, Suite 9-903, New York, NY 10032 USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Varghai NH, Rothberg MB, Nathan C, Pfoh ER. Do patients who have newly identified prediabetes lose weight in the following year? Fam Pract 2021; 38:830-833. [PMID: 34114600 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmab049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Identifying a window of opportunity when patients are motivated to lose weight might improve the effectiveness of weight loss counseling. The onset of chronic disease could create such a window. OBJECTIVE To determine whether identifying prediabetes was associated with subsequent weight loss. METHODS Our retrospective cohort study included adults with obesity and a primary care visit between 2015 and 2017. Data were collected and analysed in 2019/2020. We compared patients who developed prediabetes [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥5.7 and <6.5] to patients with a normal HbA1c (<5.7). We ran linear regression models to identify the association between identifying prediabetes and percent body mass index (BMI) change at 6 and 12 months. The adjusted model controlled for demographic characteristics at baseline, Charlson comorbidity score, and metformin, antipsychotic, antidepressant and antiobesity medication prescribed in either the first 3 months (for the 6-month outcome) or first 9 months (for 12-month outcome) and clustering within physician. RESULTS Of 11 290 participants, 43% developed prediabetes. At 6 months, 15% of the prediabetes group lost ≥5% of their BMI compared with 13% of the comparison group. The results were similar at 12 months with 18% of the prediabetes group losing ≥5% of their BMI compared with 17%. The prediabetes group lost a higher percentage of their BMI (β = -0.7% versus -0.3% at 6 months and β = -0.5% versus 0.01% at 12 months). CONCLUSIONS While the percent of BMI change was small, patients with newly identified prediabetes lost more weight than a comparison group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michael B Rothberg
- Cleveland Clinic Community Care, Center for Value Based Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Cassandra Nathan
- Cleveland Clinic Community Care, Center for Value Based Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Elizabeth R Pfoh
- Cleveland Clinic Community Care, Center for Value Based Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Paskins Z, Bullock L, Crawford-Manning F, Cottrell E, Fleming J, Leyland S, Edwards JJ, Clark E, Thomas S, Chapman SR, Ryan S, Lefroy JE, Gidlow CJ, Iglesias C, Protheroe J, Horne R, O'Neill TW, Mallen C, Jinks C. Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments: a protocol for Development of a consultation intervention (iFraP-D). BMJ Open 2021; 11:e048811. [PMID: 34408051 PMCID: PMC8375717 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Prevention of fragility fractures, a source of significant economic and personal burden, is hindered by poor uptake of fracture prevention medicines. Enhancing communication of scientific evidence and elicitation of patient medication-related beliefs has the potential to increase patient commitment to treatment. The Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) programme aims to develop and evaluate a theoretically informed, complex intervention consisting of a computerised web-based decision support tool, training package and information resources, to facilitate informed decision-making about fracture prevention treatment, with a long-term aim of improving informed treatment adherence. This protocol focuses on the iFraP Development (iFraP-D) work. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The approach to iFraP-D is informed by the Medical Research Council complex intervention development and evaluation framework and the three-step implementation of change model. The context for the study is UK fracture liaison services (FLS), which enact secondary fracture prevention. An evidence synthesis of clinical guidelines and Delphi exercise will be conducted to identify content for the intervention. Focus groups with patients, FLS clinicians and general practitioners and a usual care survey will facilitate understanding of current practice, and investigate barriers and facilitators to change. Design of the iFraP intervention will be informed by decision aid development standards and theories of implementation, behaviour change, acceptability and medicines adherence. The principles of co-design will underpin all elements of the study through a dedicated iFraP community of practice including key stakeholders and patient advisory groups. In-practice testing of the prototype intervention will inform revisions ready for further testing in a subsequent pilot and feasibility randomised trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval was obtained from North West-Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (19/NW/0559). Dissemination and knowledge mobilisation will be facilitated through national bodies and networks, publications and presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER researchregistry5041.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoe Paskins
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Haywood Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | | | - Fay Crawford-Manning
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Haywood Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | | | - Jane Fleming
- Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | - Emma Clark
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Simon Thomas
- School of Pharmacy and Bioengineering, Keele University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | | | - Sarah Ryan
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Haywood Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
- School of Medicine & School of Nursing and Midwifery, Keele University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | - J E Lefroy
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | | | - C Iglesias
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
- Danish Centre for Healthcare Improvements, Aalborg Universitet, Aalborg, Denmark
| | | | - Robert Horne
- Centre for Behavioural Medicine, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | - Terence W O'Neill
- Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Clare Jinks
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Canals-Ruiz L, Comellas M, Lizán L. Preferences, satisfaction and decision-making processes in osteoporosis treatment: a systematic review of the literature. J Comp Eff Res 2021; 10:629-645. [PMID: 33880940 DOI: 10.2217/cer-2020-0216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To synthesize information available in the literature on patients' preferences and satisfaction with osteoporosis treatment and their unmet needs on the treatment decision-making process. Materials & methods: Systematic literature review consulting international database and grey literature of articles published between January 1, 2009 and January 1, 2019. Results: Nineteen publications were reviewed, 79% of them focused on evaluating the importance that patients attached to the mode and frequency of administration, adverse events and treatment efficacy. 21% of them provided information about treatment satisfaction and 26% regarding unmet needs on treatment-decision making process. Conclusion: Aligning treatment with patients' preferences, promoting physician-patient communication and identifying patients' concerns with treatment may contribute to improve treatment satisfaction and adherence and ultimately achieve the treatment goal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Luís Lizán
- Outcomes10, Castellon, Spain.,Department of Medicine, University Jaume I, Castellon, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Jarab AS, Mukattash TL, Hilan H. Medication Non-adherence in Patients with Osteoporosis: Implications for Clinical Pharmacists and Osteoporosis Care Providers. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 15:243-250. [DOI: 10.2174/1574884715666200116104754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2019] [Revised: 10/06/2019] [Accepted: 12/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
Background:
Poor adherence to the prescribed therapy leads to low bone mineral density
and enhance the development of osteoporosis complications and unnecessary hospitalization.
Objective:
To explore factors associated with medication non-adherence in patients with osteoporosis.
Findings would help guide the development of future pharmaceutical care interventions aim at
improving health outcomes for patients with osteoporosis.
Methods:
The study was conducted at an outpatient osteoporosis clinic at the Royal Medical Services
Hospital. Variables including socio-demographics and medical factors were collected using
medical records and custom-designed questionnaire. Medication adherence was assessed using the
validated 4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale. Logistic regression was performed to develop
a model with variables that best predicted medication non-adherence in patients with osteoporosis
in Jordan.
Results:
A total of 296 patients participated in the study. Most of the study participants (72.3%)
were found non-adherent. Patients were found less likely to adhere to the prescribed medications
with each unit increase in the number of prescribed medications (OR = 2.503, CI = 1.103-5.680)
and if they did not have a trust in the efficacy of the medications (OR = 5.544, CI = 0.990-31.058).
Conclusion:
Medication adherence for patients with osteoporosis has considered scope for improvement
in Jordan. Simplifying dosage regimen in addition to taking patients’ preferences when
selecting the medications should be taken into account in future interventions designed to improve
health outcomes for patients with osteoporosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anan S. Jarab
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, 22110, Jordan
| | - Tareq L. Mukattash
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, 22110, Jordan
| | - Hayat Hilan
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, 22110, Jordan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Paskins Z, Torres Roldan VD, Hawarden AW, Bullock L, Meritxell Urtecho S, Torres GF, Morera L, Espinoza Suarez NR, Worrall A, Blackburn S, Chapman S, Jinks C, Brito JP. Quality and effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment decision aids: a systematic review and environmental scan. Osteoporos Int 2020; 31:1837-1851. [PMID: 32500301 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05479-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 05/25/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
Decision aids (DAs) are evidence-based tools that support shared decision-making (SDM) implementation in practice; this study aimed to identify existing osteoporosis DAs and assess their quality and efficacy; and to gain feedback from a patient advisory group on findings and implications for further research. We searched multiple bibliographic databases to identify research studies from 2000 to 2019 and undertook an environmental scan (search conducted February 2019, repeated in March 2020). A pair of reviewers, working independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, evaluated each trial's risk of bias, and conducted DA quality assessment using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). Public contributors (patients and caregivers with experience of osteoporosis and fragility fractures) participated in discussion groups to review a sample of DAs, express preferences for a new DA, and discuss plans for development of a new DA. We identified 6 studies, with high or unclear risk of bias. Across included studies, use of an osteoporosis DA was reported to result in reduced decisional conflict compared with baseline, increased SDM, and increased accuracy of patients' perceived fracture risk compared with controls. Eleven DAs were identified, of which none met the full set of IPDAS criteria for certification for minimization of bias. Public contributors expressed preferences for encounter DAs that are individualized to patients' own needs and risk. Using a systematic review and environmental scan, we identified 11 decision aids to inform patient decisions about osteoporosis treatment and 6 studies evaluating their effectiveness. Use of decision aids increased accuracy of risk perception and shared decision-making but the decision aids themselves fail to comprehensively meet international quality standards and patient needs, underpinning the need for new DA development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Z Paskins
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, ST6 7AG, UK.
| | - V D Torres Roldan
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Endocrinology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - A W Hawarden
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, ST6 7AG, UK
| | - L Bullock
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - S Meritxell Urtecho
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Endocrinology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - G F Torres
- Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru
| | - L Morera
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Endocrinology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - N R Espinoza Suarez
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Endocrinology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - A Worrall
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - S Blackburn
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - S Chapman
- School of Pharmacy and Bioengineering, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - C Jinks
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - J P Brito
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Endocrinology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Wilton-Clark MS, Feasel AL, Kline GA, Billington EO. Autonomy begets adherence: decisions to start and persist with osteoporosis treatment after group medical consultation. Arch Osteoporos 2020; 15:138. [PMID: 32888079 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-020-00809-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2020] [Accepted: 08/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED Many individuals prescribed osteoporosis pharmacotherapy either do not start or do not persist with treatment. In this study, women who attended a group medical visit at an osteoporosis center which involved fracture risk assessment and focused on autonomous decision-making made treatment decisions with high confidence. Those who started pharmacotherapy were highly persistent. PURPOSE Adherence and persistence with osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is low, possibly reflecting lack of confidence in physicians' treatment recommendations. We evaluated treatment decisions, decisional confidence, and 12-month treatment adherence among women who attended a group bone health consultation that fostered autonomous decision-making. METHODS We prospectively assessed postmenopausal women referred to an osteoporosis clinic who chose to attend a group medical visit in lieu of one-on-one consultation. The group visit was facilitated by a specialist physician and nurse, involving estimation of 10-year major osteoporotic fracture risk (using FRAX®) and extensive education regarding fracture consequences and potential advantages and disadvantages of pharmacotherapy. No direct advice was given by the specialist. Post-consult, participants made an autonomous decision regarding treatment intent and followed up with their family physician to enact their chosen plan. Intentions to initiate pharmacotherapy were assessed immediately post-consult. Treatment status and decisional confidence were evaluated 3 and 12 months later. Three-month treatment status was considered to reflect final treatment decision. Persistence was defined as proportion of participants on treatment at 3 months who remained treated at 12 months. RESULTS One hundred one women (mean (SD) age, 62.7 years (5.8); median (IQR) FRAX®, 10.7% (8.3-17.6)) participated. Immediately post-consult, 27 (26.7%) intended to initiate treatment. At 3 months, 23 (22.8%) were treated, and at 12 months, 21 (91.3%) remained persistent. Of 89 questionnaire respondents at 12 months, 85 (95.5%) reported confidence in their treatment decision. CONCLUSION When postmenopausal women are provided with individualized fracture risk estimates and enabled to make autonomous decisions regarding pharmacotherapy, ultimate decisions to receive treatment are made with confidence and result in high persistence at 12 months.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madeline S Wilton-Clark
- Undergraduate Medical Education, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - A Lynn Feasel
- Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Richmond Road Diagnostic and Treatment Centre, 1820 Richmond Road SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2T 5C7, Canada
| | - Gregory A Kline
- Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Richmond Road Diagnostic and Treatment Centre, 1820 Richmond Road SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2T 5C7, Canada.,Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Emma O Billington
- Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. .,Richmond Road Diagnostic and Treatment Centre, 1820 Richmond Road SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2T 5C7, Canada. .,Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hitz MF, Arup S, Holm JP, Soerensen AL, Gerds TA, Jensen JEB. Outcome of osteoporosis evaluation, treatment, and follow-up in patients referred to a specialized outpatient clinic compared to patients in care of general practitioners. Arch Osteoporos 2020; 15:97. [PMID: 32588150 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-020-00774-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED In Denmark, osteoporosis treatment is either handled by general practitioners or at more resource demanding specialist clinics. We evaluated the treatment adherence and persistence in the two settings, which were overall similar. The type of medical support did, however, differ and was provided to two very different patient populations. PURPOSE The study aimed to investigate the effect of patient care by general practitioners (GPs) or specialists on treatment adherence among osteoporosis patients initiating treatment with oral bisphosphonates (OB). METHODS Dual-energy X-ray absorption (DXA)-scanning data from 2005 to 2013 were extracted. Treatment naïve patients with a T-score ≤ - 2.5 (spine or hip) were included. Information on medical treatment, comorbidities, and socio-economic status was extracted from Danish registries. Scanning results were evaluated by a specialist. Subsequent treatment initiation and follow-up was either handled by GPs or specialists: GP population (GPP) vs. specialist population (SP). Primary adherence was defined as treatment initiating within 12 months from diagnosis and secondary adherence as days with medicine possession rates (MPR) > 80%. RESULTS Of 11,201 DXA-scanned patients, 3685 met the inclusion criteria (GPP = 2177, SP = 1508). The GPP consisted of relatively more men, was older, had shorter education, lower income, and more comorbidities. There was no difference in baseline T-score or prior incidence of major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs). The GPP was primarily treated with OB and had better primary adherence (adjusted ORGPP/SP = 1.52 [1.31-1.75], p < 0.0001) than the SP that to a higher degree received another treatment. Secondary adherence was similar (adjusted ORGPP/SP: OR12 months = 1.02 [0.83-1.26]; OR24 months = 0.90 [0.73-1.10]; OR4 years = 0.88 [0.71-1.07]; OR5 years = 0.91 [0.74-1.13]. CONCLUSION Patients in care of specialists were most likely to receive a treatment other than OB. Primary adherence was highest in the GPP, whereas short- and long-term persistence was similar for up to 5 years whether treated by a specialist or a GP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mette Friberg Hitz
- National Center for Bone Health, Medical Department, Endocrinology, Zealand University Hospital, Lykkebaekvej 1, 4600, Koege, Denmark. .,Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Blegdansvej 3B, 2200, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
| | - Sofie Arup
- National Center for Bone Health, Medical Department, Endocrinology, Zealand University Hospital, Lykkebaekvej 1, 4600, Koege, Denmark
| | - Jakob Praest Holm
- Department of Endocrinology, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegaards Alle 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark
| | - Anne Lyngholm Soerensen
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Oster Farigmagsgade 5, 1014, Copenhagen K, Denmark
| | - Thomas Alexander Gerds
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Oster Farigmagsgade 5, 1014, Copenhagen K, Denmark
| | - Jens-Erik Beck Jensen
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Blegdansvej 3B, 2200, Copenhagen N, Denmark.,Department of Endocrinology, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegaards Alle 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cheng ZY, Ji M, Yang Y, Wu XJ. Layered bifuncational Co(II) coordination polymer for photodegradation of organic dyes and anti-osteoporosis activity by activating wnt/β-catenin/PPARγ pathway in BMSCs. INORG NANO-MET CHEM 2020. [DOI: 10.1080/24701556.2020.1745835] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi-Yong Cheng
- Department of Orthopedics, Chongqing Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Ming Ji
- Department of Orthopedics, Chongqing Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Yong Yang
- Department of Orthopedics, Chongqing Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Xue-Jian Wu
- Department of Surgery, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Malik AT, Retchin S, Phillips FM, Xu W, Peters K, Yu E, Khan SN. Declining trend in osteoporosis management and screening following vertebral compression fractures - a national analysis of commercial insurance and medicare advantage beneficiaries. Spine J 2020; 20:538-546. [PMID: 31683068 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.10.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2019] [Revised: 10/09/2019] [Accepted: 10/28/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Despite the increasing national incidence, osteoporosis and its associated comanagement, often remain an overlooked issue in the orthopedic world. Screening and associated management of osteoporosis is often only considered by providers when patients present with multiple fragility fractures. Current evidence with regard to the trends in screening and medical comanagement/antiosteoporotic therapy of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) remains limited. PURPOSE To understand trends, costs, and clinical impact associated the utilization of antiosteoporotic medication and screening with the 1 year following occurrences of sentinel/primary osteoporotic VCFs. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Retrospective review of 2008-2015Q3 Humana Administrative Claims (HAC) database. PATIENT SAMPLE The 2008-2015Q3 HAC database was queried using International Classification of Diseases 9th Edition (ICD-9) diagnosis codes 805.2 and 805.4 to identify patients with primary closed osteoporotic thoracolumbar VCFs. Patients with a concurrent diagnosis of trauma and/or malignancy were excluded. Patients experiencing a fragility fracture of the hip, distal radius or proximal humerus, and/or those already on osteoporotic medications within the year before the VCF were excluded to prevent an overlap in the screening and/or antiresorptive medication rates. Finally, only those patients who had complete 2-year follow-up data were analyzed. OUTCOME MEASURES To understand trends over time in the utilization of medication for osteoporosis and screening within 1 year following sentinel VCFs. The study also aimed to report per-prescription and per-patient average costs associated with different antiosteoporotic medications. As secondary objectives, we also assessed (1) risk factors associated with not receiving antiosteoporotic medication within the year following sentinel VCFs and (2) differences in rates of experiencing a secondary fragility fracture of vertebrae, hip, distal radius, and proximal humerus between patients who received medication following the sentinel VCF versus those who did not receive any medication. RESULTS A total of 6,464 primary osteoporotic VCFs were retrieved from the database. A majority of the VCFs were seen in females (N=5,199; 80.4%). Only 28.8% (N=1,860) patients received some form of medication for osteoporosis medication in the year following the VCF. Over a 6-year interval, treatment with medication for osteoporosis declined from 38% in 2008 to 24% in 2014. The average cost of antiosteoporotic treatment per patient was $1,511. The most commonly prescribed treatment and associated average cost/patient was alendronate sodium (N=1,239; 66.6% to $120/patient). The most costly prescribed treatment was Forteo (N=177; 2.7%) with an average cost/patient of $12,074 and cost/injection being $2,373. Only 36.7% (N=2,371) received a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry/bone density scan in the year following the VCF with an average cost/patient of $76. Risk factors associated with no prescription of medication for osteoporosis within 1 year of VCF were male gender (odds ratio [OR] 1.17 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.01-1.35]; p=.027), history of cerebrovascular accident/stroke (OR 1.56 [95% CI 1.08-2.32]; p=.022), history of diabetes mellitus (OR 1.28 [95% CI 1.04-1.58]; p=.023). Of note, patients in the West versus Midwest (OR 1.26 [95% CI 1.04-1.51]; p=.016) and commercial insurance beneficiaries (OR 1.95 [95% CI 1.08-3.52]; p=.027) were more likely to receive antiosteoporotic medication. Patients who were placed on antiosteoporotic medication were significantly less likely to suffer a second fragility fracture compared with patients that did not receive medication (OR 0.27 [95% CI 0.24-0.31]; p=.033). CONCLUSIONS The proportion of patients starting antiosteoporotic medication within a year after a VCF remains low (28.8%). Furthermore, a declining trend of antiosteoporotic medication prescription was noted over time. Providers who care for patients with sentinel VCFs need to be more diligent in their efforts to diagnose and treat the underlying osteoporosis to reduce the burden of future fragility fractures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Azeem Tariq Malik
- Department of Orthopedics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 410 W 10th Av, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Sheldon Retchin
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, OH, USA; Division of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Frank M Phillips
- Midwest Orthopedics at Rush, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Wendy Xu
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, OH, USA; Division of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Kaleigh Peters
- Department of Orthopedics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 410 W 10th Av, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Elizabeth Yu
- Department of Orthopedics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 410 W 10th Av, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Safdar N Khan
- Department of Orthopedics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 410 W 10th Av, Columbus, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Billington EO, Feasel AL, Kline GA. At Odds About the Odds: Women's Choices to Accept Osteoporosis Medications Do Not Closely Agree with Physician-Set Treatment Thresholds. J Gen Intern Med 2020; 35:276-282. [PMID: 31625042 PMCID: PMC6957614 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05384-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2019] [Revised: 07/22/2019] [Accepted: 09/04/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Osteoporosis guidelines recommend pharmacologic therapy based on 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture, which may fail to account for patient-specific experiences and values. OBJECTIVE We aimed to determine whether patient decisions to initiate osteoporosis medication agree with guideline-recommended intervention thresholds. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS This prospective cohort study included women aged ≥ 45 with age-associated osteoporosis who attended a group osteoporosis self-management consultation at a tertiary osteoporosis center. INTERVENTION A group osteoporosis self-management consultation, during which participants received osteoporosis education and then calculated1 their 10-year MOF and hip fracture risk using FRAX and2 their predicted absolute fracture risk with therapy (assuming 40% relative reduction). Participants then made autonomous decisions regarding treatment initiation. MAIN MEASURES We evaluated agreement between treatment decisions and physician-set intervention thresholds (10-year MOF risk ≥ 20%, hip fracture risk ≥ 3%). KEY RESULTS Among 85 women (median [IQR] age 62 [58-67]), 27% accepted treatment (median [IQR] MOF risk, 15.1% [9.9-22.0]; hip fracture risk, 3.3% [1.3-5.3]), 46% declined (MOF risk, 9.5% [6.5-11.6]; hip fracture risk, 1.8% [0.6-2.3]), and 27% remained undecided (MOF risk, 14.0% [9.8-20.2]; hip fracture risk, 4.4% [1.7-4.9]). There was wide overlap in fracture risk between treatment acceptors and non-acceptors. Odds of accepting treatment were higher in women with prior fragility fracture (50% accepted; OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.9-15.2; p = 0.0015) and with hip fracture risk ≥ 3% (32% accepted; OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.4-9.2; p = 0.012), but not MOF risk ≥ 20% (47% accepted; OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.0-8.5; p = 0.105). CONCLUSIONS Informed decisions to start osteoporosis treatment are highly personal and not easily predicted using fracture risk. Guideline-recommended intervention thresholds may not permit sufficient consideration of patient preferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma O Billington
- Division of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. .,Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| | - A Lynn Feasel
- Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Gregory A Kline
- Division of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Dr. David Hanley Osteoporosis Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Yeam CT, Chia S, Tan HCC, Kwan YH, Fong W, Seng JJB. A systematic review of factors affecting medication adherence among patients with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2018; 29:2623-2637. [PMID: 30417253 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-018-4759-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 111] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2018] [Accepted: 10/30/2018] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this review was to identify factors that influence patients' adherence to anti-osteoporotic therapy. Factors identified that were associated with poorer medication adherence included polypharmacy, older age, and misconceptions about osteoporosis. Physicians need to be aware of these factors so as to optimize therapeutic outcomes for patients. INTRODUCTION To identify factors that influence patients' adherence to anti-osteoporotic therapy. METHODS A systematic review of literature was performed for articles published up till January 2018 using PubMed®, PsychINFO®, Embase®, and CINAHL®. Peer-reviewed articles which examined factors associated with anti-osteoporotic medication adherence were included. Classes of anti-osteoporotic therapy included bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone-related analogue, denosumab, selective estrogen receptor modulators, estrogen/progestin therapy, calcitonin, and strontium ranelate. Meta-analyses, case reports/series, and other systematic reviews were excluded. Identified factors were classified using the World Health Organization's five dimensions of medication adherence (condition, patient, therapy, health-system, and socio-economic domains). RESULTS Of 2404 articles reviewed, 124 relevant articles were identified. The prevalence of medication adherence ranged from 12.9 to 95.4%. Twenty-four factors with 139 sub-factors were identified. Bisphosphonates were the most well-studied class of medication (n = 59, 48%). Condition-related factors that were associated with poorer medication adherence included polypharmacy, and history of falls was associated with higher medication adherence. Patient-related factors which were associated with poorer medication adherence included older age and misconceptions about osteoporosis while therapy-related factors included higher dosing frequency and medication side effects. Health system-based factors associated with poorer medication adherence included care under different medical specialties and lack of patient education. Socio-economic-related factors associated with poorer medication adherence included current smoker and lack of medical insurance coverage. CONCLUSION This review identified factors associated with poor medication adherence among osteoporotic patients. To optimize therapeutic outcomes for patients, clinicians need to be aware of the complexity of factors affecting medication adherence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C T Yeam
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
| | - S Chia
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
| | - H C C Tan
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
| | - Y H Kwan
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
- Program in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
| | - W Fong
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore
- Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore, 169608, Singapore
- Department of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - J J B Seng
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Raybould G, Babatunde O, Evans AL, Jordan JL, Paskins Z. Expressed information needs of patients with osteoporosis and/or fragility fractures: a systematic review. Arch Osteoporos 2018; 13:55. [PMID: 29736627 PMCID: PMC5938310 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-018-0470-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2018] [Accepted: 04/23/2018] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED This systematic review identified patients have unmet information needs about the nature of osteoporosis, medication, self-management and follow-up. Clinician knowledge and attitudes appear to be of key importance in determining whether these needs are met. Unmet information needs appear to have psychosocial consequences and result in poor treatment adherence. PURPOSE Patient education is an integral component of the management of osteoporosis, yet patients are dissatisfied with the information they receive and see this as an area of research priority. This study aimed to describe and summarise the specific expressed information needs of patients in previously published qualitative research. METHODS Using terms relating to osteoporosis, fragility fracture and information needs, seven databases were searched. Articles were screened using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full-text articles selected for inclusion underwent data extraction and quality appraisal. Findings were drawn together using narrative synthesis. RESULTS The search identified 11,024 articles. Sixteen empirical studies were included in the review. Thematic analysis revealed three overarching themes relating to specific information needs, factors influencing whether information needs are met and the impact of unmet information needs. Specific information needs identified included the following: the nature of osteoporosis/fracture risk; medication; self-management and understanding the role of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry and follow-up. Perceived physician knowledge and attitudes, and the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of patients were important factors in influencing whether information needs were met, in addition to contextual factors and the format of educational resources. Failure to elicit and address information needs appears to be associated with poor treatment adherence, deterioration of the doctor-patient relationship and important psychosocial consequences. CONCLUSION This is the first study to describe the information needs of patients with osteoporosis and fracture, the impact of this information gap and possible solutions. Further research is needed to co-design and evaluate educational interventions with patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grace Raybould
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Science, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK
| | - Opeyemi Babatunde
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Science, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK
| | - Amy L. Evans
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Science, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK
| | - Joanne L. Jordan
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Science, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK
| | - Zoe Paskins
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Science, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK ,Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, ST6 7AG UK
| |
Collapse
|