Results of a model of secondary prevention for osteoporotic fracture coordinated by rheumatology and focused on the nurse and primary care physicians

Secondary fracture prevention in primary care: a narrative review

The global burden of osteoporosis continues to rise with an ageing population. Untreated osteoporotic fractures not only heighten the risk of subsequent fractures but are associated with excess mortality. Although primary care guidelines consistently stress the importance of secondary fracture prevention, fewer than 20% of patients are appropriately treated for osteoporosis following an initial osteoporotic fracture. This worldwide phenomenon is known as the osteoporosis care gap. This literature review examines the barriers to secondary fracture prevention in primary care and evaluates the effectiveness of targeted primary care interventions. Common themes emerged from the majority of qualitative studies, including a need for improved communication between the hospital team and primary care, better defined responsibilities and osteoporosis-directed education for the primary care physicians. Quantitative studies demonstrated that most targeted, intensive interventions aimed at educating patients and their primary care physician about osteoporosis treatment significantly increased rates of investigation and treatment. Greater uptake of models of secondary fracture prevention in primary care is urgently needed to address the osteoporosis care gap.

Approach to the Patient With Bone Fracture: Making the First Fracture the Last

The global burden of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures will increase significantly as we enter a rapidly aging population. Osteoporotic fractures lead to increased morbidity, mortality, and risk of subsequent fractures if left untreated. However, studies have shown that the majority of patients who suffer an osteoporotic fracture are not investigated or treated for osteoporosis, leading to an inexcusable "osteoporosis care gap." Systematic and coordinated models of care in secondary fracture prevention known as fracture liaison services (FLS) have been established to streamline and improve the care of patients with osteoporotic fractures, and employ core principles of identification, investigation, and initiation of treatment. Our approach to the multifaceted care of secondary fracture prevention at a hospital-based FLS is illustrated through several case vignettes.

Active identification of vertebral fracture in the FLS model of care

The identification of vertebral fracture is a key point in an FLS. We have analyzed the characteristics of 570 patients according to the route of identification (referral by other doctors, emergency registry or through VFA), concluding that promoting referral by other doctors with a training campaign is effective.

PURPOSE

Vertebral fractures (VF) are associated with increased risk of further VFs. Our objective was to analyze the characteristics of patients with VF seen in a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS).

METHODS

An observational study was carried out on patients with VF referred to the outpatient metabolic clinic (OMC) after a training campaign, identified in the emergency registry, and captured by VF assessment with bone densitometry (DXA-VFA) in patients with non-VFs. Patients with traumatic VF or VF > 1 year, infiltrative or neoplastic disease were excluded. The number and severity of VFs (Genant) were analyzed. Treatment initiation in the first 6 months after baseline visit was reviewed.

RESULTS

Overall, 570 patients were included, mean age 73. The most common route for identifying VF was through referral to OMC (303 cases), followed by the emergency registry (198) and DXA-VFA (69). Osteoporosis by DXA was found in 312 (58%) patients and 259 (45%) had ≥ 2 VFs. The rate of grade 3 VFs was highest among patients on the emergency registry. Those identified through OMC had a higher number of VFs, a higher rate of osteoporosis, more risk factors and greater treatment initiation. Patients with VFs detected by DXA-VFA were mostly women with a single VF and had a lower rate of osteoporosis by DXA.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the distribution of VFs by the route of identification in an FLS. Promoting referral by other doctors with a training campaign may help in the quality improvement of the FLS-based model of care.

Implications of FRAX® adjusted for recent fracture on the indication of treatment in an FLS

We analyzed the practical consequences of applying an adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in a FLS. After analyzing 2777 patients, we concluded that the adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA and is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available.

PURPOSE

A FRAX® adjusted to fractures less than 2 years old has been proposed. The objective of this work was to analyze the clinical implications of applying the adjusted FRAX® instead of the classic FRAX® in a fracture liaison service (FLS) unit.

METHODS

Adults aged 50 years or older with fragility fractures (hip, spine, humerus, and forearm) that occurred in the 12 months prior to the baseline visit were included. We recorded demographic data, type of fracture, DXA, classic FRAX®, and FRAX® adjusted for recent fractures and indications for anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) following the guidelines of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology.

RESULTS

A total of 2777 patients were included, mean age 73 years, 84% women. The type of fracture was as follows: forearm (n = 958; 34.5%), hip (n = 781; 28.1%), humerus (n = 642; 23.1%), and spine (n = 397, 14.3%). DXA was performed in 2134 cases (76.8%). A total of 2522 patients (90.8%) were candidates for AOM (100% involving the hip and spine, 83% forearm, and 85% humerus). FRAX®-hip ≥ 3% increased from 1601 to 1775 cases (57.6 to 64%). The average FRAX®-hip (SD) increased from 5.7 (6) to 7.5 (9) (4.6 to 8.8 in males and 5.9 to 7.3 in females). The percentage of forearm fracture candidates for AOM, with or without DXA, did not change after FRAX®-hip adjustment, while the number of patients with humerus fractures increased from 59 to 80% in those who did not have DXA. In the entire sample, FRAX®-adjusted led to an indication of AOM for 15 additional patients (0.5% of major fractures): 14 with a humerus fracture and 1 with a forearm fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in an FLS unit in an adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA; in fact, it is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available.

Long-term persistence of treatment after hip fracture in a fracture liaison service

Long-term adherence to antiosteoporosis medication (AOM) in the setting of a fracture liaison service (FLS) are not well known. Patients ≥ 50 with hip fracture seen in an FLS and recommended for treatment to prevent new fractures were analyzed. Baseline data included demographics, identification mode, previous treatment and FRAX items. Patient records were reviewed 3-8 years later, and these data were collected: (1) survival; (2) major refracture; (3) initiation of treatment, proportion of days covered (PDC) and persistence with AOM. 372 patients (mean age, 79 years; 76% women) were included. Mean follow-up was 47 months, 52 patients (14%) had a refracture (22 hip) and 129 (34.5%) died. AOM was started in 283 patients (76.0%). Factors associated with initiation of AOM were previous use of bisphosphonate (OR 9.94; 95% CI 1.29-76.32) and a lower T-score lumbar (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65-0.99). Persistence decreased to 72.6%, 60% and 47% at 12, 36 and 60 months. A PDC > 80% was confirmed in 208 patients (55.7%) and associated with previous use of bisphosphonate (OR 3.38; 95% CI 1.34-8.53), treatment with denosumab (OR 2.69; 95% CI:1.37-5.27), and inpatient identification (OR 2.26; 95% CI 1.18-4.34). Long-term persistence with AOM was optimal in patients with hip fracture seen at an FLS. A PDC > 80% was associated with inpatient identification and prescription of denosumab.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fracture Liaison Services Compared with Standard of Care in the Secondary Prevention of Fragility Fractures in Spain

Purpose

To assess the cost-effectiveness of a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) compared with standard care for the secondary prevention of fragility fractures in Spain.

Methods

Patients with osteoporosis and an initial fragility fracture who were candidates to initiate osteoporosis treatment (mean age 65 years, 90.7% female) were included in the model. Disease progression was simulated with a Markov model through seven health states (with and without osteoporosis treatment, subsequent hip, vertebral, forearm and humerus fracture, and death). A time horizon of 10 years and a 6-month duration per cycle was set. Clinical, economic, and quality of life parameters were estimated from the literature and Spanish clinical practice. Resource use and treatment patterns were validated by an expert panel. The Spanish National Health System (SNS) perspective was adopted, taking direct costs (€; 2020) into account. Effectiveness was measured in life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years gained (QALYs). A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes. The uncertainty of the parameters was assessed using deterministic, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (1000 iterations).

Results

Setting up a FLS for the secondary prevention of fragility fractures in Spain would provide better osteoporosis treatment initiation and persistence. This would reduce subsequent fragility fractures, disutilities and deaths. FLS would have greater clinical benefits (0.008 and 0.082 LYG and QALY gained per patient, respectively) and higher costs (€563.69 per patient) compared with standard care, leading to an incremental cost-utility ratio of €6855.23 per QALY gained over the 10 years horizon. The sensitivity analyses showed limited dispersion of the base case results, corroborating their robustness.

Conclusion

From the SNS perspective and considering Spanish willingness-to-pay thresholds, the introduction of FLS for the secondary prevention of fragility fractures would be a cost-effective strategy.

Fracture liaison service model: treatment persistence 5 years later

We analyzed the long-term persistence of treatment in a FLS. During follow-up, 15.2% of patients had a refracture and 23.8% died. At the 5-year checkup, 74% had started treatment (associated with female sex, previous use of bisphosphonate, and referral to an osteoporosis clinic). Persistence at 1 and 5 years was 70.6% and 46.5%, respectively.

INTRODUCTION

To analyze the long-term persistence of treatment in a fracture liaison service (FLS).

METHODS

Patients ≥ 50 years with a fragility fracture attended between 2012 and 2016 who were recommended for treatment to prevent new fractures were included. Baseline data included demographics, type of fracture, previous treatment, and FRAX® items. Five years later, patient records were reviewed and the following data were collected: [1] survival; [2] refracture; [3] initiation of treatment, persistence, and medication possession ratio (MPR) > 80%.

RESULTS

We included 888 patients, mean age 75 years, 83% women, and mean follow-up 56 months. During follow-up, 135 patients (15.2%) had a refracture (109 major fractures, 50 hip refractures) and 212 patients died (23.8%); at the 5-year checkup, 657 patients (74%) had started some type of treatment. Factors associated with the start of treatment were female sex (OR 2.10; 95% CI: 1.42-3.11), previous use of bisphosphonate (OR 3.91; 95% CI: 2.23-6.86), and referral to an osteoporosis clinic (OR 1.46; 95% CI: 1.02-2.07). Persistence decreased from 70.6% at 12 months to 46.5% at 60 months. An MPR > 80% was confirmed in 449 patients, 68.3% of whom were under treatment. A total of 521 and 447 patients received treatment for at least 24 and 36 months, respectively (79.3% and 68.0% of those who started treatment).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with fragility fractures attended at an FLS showed optimal long-term persistence of treatment. These data can help healthcare managers better calculate the cost-effectiveness of implementing the FLS model.

Multidisciplinary expert consensus on secondary fracture prevention in Spain

The study aimed to achieve expert consensus to optimize secondary fracture prevention in Spain. Relevant gaps in current patient management were identified. However, some aspects were considered difficult to apply. Future efforts should focus on those items with greatest divergences between importance and feasibility.

PURPOSE

To establish a Spanish multidisciplinary expert consensus on secondary fracture prevention.

METHODS

A two-round Delphi consensus was conducted, guided by a Scientific Committee. The 43-item study questionnaire was designed from a literature review and a subsequent multidisciplinary expert group (n = 12) discussion. The first-round questionnaire, using a 7-point Likert scale, assessed the experts' opinion of the current situation, their wish for items to happen, and their prognosis that items would be implemented within 5 years. Items for which consensus was not achieved were included in the second round. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement or ≥ 75% disagreement. A total of 102 experts from 14 scientific societies were invited to participate.

RESULTS

A total of 75 (response rate 73.5%) and 69 (92.0%) experts answered the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively. Participants mean age was 51.8 years [standard deviation (SD): 10.1 years]; being 24.0% rheumatologists, 21.3% primary care physicians, 14.7% geriatricians, 8.0% internal medicine specialists, 8.0% rehabilitation physicians, and 8.0% gynecologists. Consensus was achieved for 79.1% of items (wish, 100%; prognosis, 58.1%). Effective secondary prevention strategies identified as requiring improvement included: clinical report standardization, effective hospital primary care communication (telephone/mail and case managers), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires use, and treatment compliance monitoring (prognosis agreement 33.3%, 47.8%, 18.8%, and 55.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A consensus was reached by health professionals in their wish to implement strategies to optimize secondary fracture prevention; however, they considered some difficult to apply. Efforts should focus on those items with currently low application and those with greatest divergence between wish and prognosis.

The evolution of an FLS in search of excellence: the experience of Gran Canaria

We present the achievements and difficulties of our pioneering FLS within the Spanish public health system over an 8-year period. Despite implementing consolidating measures at the unit, the addition of a support nurse, the establishment of a solid alliance with primary care, the involvement of primary care nurses, and starting initial prescriptions at the hospital are pending.

PURPOSE

To assess the consolidation of an FLS after its implementation as well as the problems that have arisen over time.

METHODS

The program for secondary fracture prevention was implemented in 2012. Initially manned by the same staff assigned to the rheumatology department, a part-time support nurse was added in 2016. Patients were identified from the emergency registry and, more recently, from among those admitted for hip fracture and treated in a monographic osteoporosis clinic. The baseline visit consisted of a consultation with the nurse, as well as DXA and bone metabolism analytics. Patients were referred to their primary care physician to start treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 2416 attended patients, 30% presented forearm fractures, 27% hip, 20% humerus, 10% spine, and 11% other fractures. In comparison with 2012, in 2019, the monthly average of patients had doubled, with an increased in the number of hip and spine fractures and an increase in the percentage of captured patients. The performance of DXA fell from 100 to 52%, and fewer patients were referred to the osteoporosis clinic. One in four patients was referred to a fall prevention school. Despite implementing consolidating measures at the unit (the addition of a support nurse and the establishment of a solid alliance with primary care), the involvement of primary care nurses and starting initial prescriptions at the hospital are pending.

CONCLUSIONS

We present herein the achievements made by our FLS and the difficulties within the Spanish public health system over an 8-year period.

Best Practice Framework of Fracture Liaison Services in Spain and their coordination with Primary Care

The coordination of Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) with Primary Care (PC) is necessary for the continuity of care of patients with fragility fractures. This study proposes a Best Practice Framework (BPF) and performance indicators for the implementation and follow-up of FLS-PC coordination in clinical practice in Spain.

PURPOSE

To develop a BPF for the coordination of FLS with PC in Spain and to improve the continuity of care for patients with fragility fractures.

METHODS

A Steering Committee selected experts from seven Spanish FLS and related PC doctors and nurses to participate in a best practice workshop. Selection criteria were an active FLS with an identified champion and prior contact with PC centres linked to the hospital. The main aim of the workshop was to review current FLS practices in Spain and their integration with PC. A BPF document with processes, tools, roles, and metrics was then generated.

RESULTS

Spanish FLS consists of a multidisciplinary team of physicians/nurses but with low participation of other professionals and PC staff. Evaluation and treatment strategies are widely variable. Four desired standards were agreed upon: (1) Effective channels for FLS-PC communication; (2) minimum contents of an FLS clinical report and its delivery to PC; (3) adherence monitoring 3 months after FLS baseline visit; and (4) follow-up by PC. Proposed key performance indicators are (a) number of FLS-PC communications, including consensus protocols; (b) confirmation FLS report received by PC; (c) medical/nursing PC appointment after FLS report received; and (d) number of training sessions in PC.

CONCLUSIONS

The BPF provides a comprehensive approach for FLS-PC coordination in Spain, to promote the continuity of care in patients with fragility fractures and improve secondary prevention. The implementation of BPF recommendations and performance indicator tracking will benchmark best FLS practices in the future.

Organisational and Clinical Approach to Osteoporosis in Rheumatology: OP-SER-Excellence Survey and Consensus

OBJECTIVE

To determine and analyse the organisational approach adopted by Spanish rheumatologists to osteoporosis (OP) to define strategic priorities.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A group of experts designed a questionnaire on OP in the rheumatologist practice. The survey was sent to the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SER) members. Through the Delphi round, strategic priorities were agreed upon in OP.

RESULTS

The priorities are: 1) The SER should promote the inclusion of OP in 100% of the services and expand the training offer; 2) Rheumatology services should promote the role of the nurse in OP, promote quality indicators and referral protocols agreed with primary care in addition to promoting their training in this area; 3) The SER and Rheumatology services should promote electronic consultation, OP monographic clinics and participation in Fracture Liaison Service units.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategic priorities in OP help identify areas of improvement at organisational, structural and quality standards level in this pathology.

Impact of the implementation of a Fracture Liaison Service on pharmaceutical expenses for osteoporosis compared to an area without an FLS

INTRODUCTION

Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) model for secondary prevention of fractures has demonstrated its cost-effectiveness using decision models. We analyze the impact of a FLS on pharmaceutical expenditures for osteoporosis (OP) in real-world circumstances.

METHODS

Expenditures on OP medications from January 2011 to January 2017 were compiled. Pharmaceutical expenditures in the southern area of Gran Canaria were used as a control group to measure the impact of implementing an FLS in the northern area. We estimated generalized least squares regressions with interrupted time-series analysis where two interventions were considered: March 2012 (implementation of the FLS) and March 2016 (incorporation of nursing staff for inpatients with hip fracture).

RESULTS

The northern area incurred greater expenditures for group I and II drugs. The difference in bisphosphonates expenditures between areas varied from 10.5% higher in the northern area pre-FLS to 11.2% post-FLS and 18.3% since March 2016. However, interrupted time series models do not find a significant impact of implementation of FLS on the pharmaceutical expenditures for either drug group.

CONCLUSION

The implantation of an FLS did not lead to an increase in pharmaceutical expenditures for OP over the 5-year period compared to the standard care provided for secondary fracture preventions.

Comorbidities and medication use in patients with a recent clinical fracture at the Fracture Liaison Service

In this cross-sectional study, two-thirds of Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) patients had comorbidities and medications associated with increased bone- or fall-related fracture risk. Bone-related and fall-related fracture risk (BRR and FRR) were associated with age and fracture type, but not with gender or BMD. Systematic evaluation of these factors leads to a more profound assessment in FLS care.

INTRODUCTION

This study is a systematic evaluation of comorbidities and medications associated with increased fracture risk in patients aged 50-90 years with a recent fracture visiting the FLS.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional cohort study, comorbidities were classified according to ICD-10 and medications according to the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and further categorized into those associated BRR and FRR.

RESULTS

Of 1282 patients (72% women; 65 ± 9 years), 53% had at least one BRR, 46% had at least one FRR, and 66% at least one BRR and/or FRR. At least one BRR, as well as at least one FRR were associated with age, BMI, and fracture type, but not with gender or BMD. The proportion of patients with only BRR (± 20%) or only FRR (± 10%) was similar among ages, gender, BMI, fracture type, and BMD. The combination of at least one BRR and at least one FRR was significantly associated with age, BMI, and major fractures, but not with gender or BMD.

CONCLUSION

Comorbidities and medications associated with increased fracture risk are present in two-thirds of patients visiting the FLS. In addition, the proportion of patients having a combination of BRR and FRR increased significantly with age, BMI, and fracture severity. This indicates that systematic evaluation of these factors is important for a more profound assessment of subsequent fracture risk in FLS care.

The Phenotype of Patients with a Recent Fracture: A Literature Survey of the Fracture Liaison Service

The aetiology of fractures in patients aged 50 years and older is multifactorial, and includes bone- and fall-related risks. The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is recommended to identify patients with a recent fracture and to evaluate their subsequent fracture risk, in order to take measures to decrease the risk of subsequent fractures in patients with a high risk phenotype. A literature survey was conducted to describe components of the bone- and fall-related phenotype of patients attending the FLS. Components of the patient phenotype at the FLS have been reported in 33 studies. Patient selection varied widely in terms of patient identification, selection, and FLS attendance. Consequently, there was a high variability in FLS patient characteristics, such as mean age (64-80 years), proportion of men (13-30%), and fracture locations (2-51% hip, <1-41% vertebral, and 49-95% non-hip, non-vertebral fractures). The studies also varied in the risk evaluation performed. When reported, there was a highly variability in the percentage of patients with osteoporosis (12-54%), prevalent vertebral fractures (20-57%), newly diagnosed contributors to secondary osteoporosis and metabolic bone disorders (3-70%), and fall-related risk factors (60-84%). In FLS literature, we found a high variability in patient selection and risk evaluation, resulting in a highly variable phenotype. In order to specify the bone- and fall related phenotypes at the FLS, systematic studies on the presence and combinations of these risks are needed.

Expert Consensus on the Management of Patients with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in the Spanish Healthcare System

INTRODUCTION

The management of postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) in routine clinical practice differs considerably from guideline recommendations. The objective of our study was to reach a consensus on the management of PMO, considering prevention, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up, according to expert opinion in Spain.

METHODS

A two-round Delphi technique was conducted, including 38 experts. The questionnaire contained 35 sections, each one including 1-10 questions (n = 308) based on a literature review and contributions from the scientific steering committee. Each question was scored by experts from the current (1 = no occurrence, 9 = occurrence in all cases), wish (1 = total rejection; 9 = wish) and prediction (1 = no occurrence at all; 9 = occurs with maximum probability) perspectives. Consensus (wish and prediction perspectives) was considered when ≥75% of experts scored 7-9 (agreement) or 1-3 (disagreement).

RESULTS

Overall, consensus was achieved on 75% of questions. While protocols of clinical management and consultation/referral should be followed, their implementation is unlikely. Furthermore, the medical specialties currently involved in PMO management are poorly defined. PMO patients without fracture should be managed (prevention, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up) in both primary care and rheumatology settings; however, experts predicted that only treatment and follow-up will be assumed by these specialties. A multidisciplinary team should be involved in patients with fracture. No assessment tools are usually applied, and prediction indicated that they will not be used.

CONCLUSION

Efforts should be focused on questions with high divergence between wishes and predictions, defining actions that will improve PMO management. Collaboration between scientific societies and health authorities to address the identified opportunities of improvement is proposed.

FUNDING

Amgen S.A.

Quality standards for rheumatology outpatient clinic. The EXTRELLA project

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, outpatient clinics have undergone extensive development. At present, patients with rheumatic diseases are mainly assisted in this area. However, the quality standards of care are poorly documented.

OBJECTIVE

To develop specific quality criteria and standards for an outpatient rheumatology clinic.

METHOD

The project was based on the two-round Delphi method. The following groups of participants took part: scientific committee (13 rheumatologists), five nominal groups (45 rheumatologists and 12 nurses) and a group of discussion formed by 9 patients. Different drafts were consecutively generated until a final document was obtained that included the standards that received a punctuation equal or over 7 in at least 70% of the participants.

RESULTS

148 standards were developed, grouped into the following 9 dimensions: a) structure (22), b) clinical activity and relationship with the patients (34), c) planning (7), d) levels of priority (5), e) relations with primary care physicians, with Emergency Department and with other clinical departments, f) process (26), g) nursing (13), h) teaching and research (13) and i) activity measures (8).

CONCLUSION

This study established specific quality standards for rheumatology outpatient clinic. It can be a useful tool for organising this area in the Rheumatology Department and as a reference when proposing improvement measures to health administrators.

Two-year adherence to treatment and associated factors in a fracture liaison service in Spain

A fracture liaison service in Spain is able to maintain 73 % of the patients on antiresorptive 2 years after the fracture.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 2-year effectiveness of a program for the secondary prevention of fractures.

METHODS

Fragility fractures in patients over 50 attending the emergency room in our centre are captured by the recruitment system of a secondary prevention program. The unit is attended by a nurse, coordinated by two rheumatologists and with the collaboration of primary care consisted of a training program and annual meetings. The outcome of the program was analysed 2 years after implementation, including: (1) percentage of attendees/eligible; (2) percentage of attendees who start treatment with antiresorptive; (3) percentage of patients who retain treatment after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months; and (4) factors associated to adherence.

RESULTS

After 2 years of implementation, the program detected 1674 patients with fracture, of whom 759 finally entered the program (57 % of eligible). After 3 months, 82 % of patients prescribed an antiresorptive started treatment. After a year, 52 % of the patients in the program, 72 % of those of a prescribed treatment, were taking antiresorptives. Adherence at 24 months among those who had prescribed anti-fracture drugs was 73 %. Factors associated with adherence at 12 months were female sex (76 vs 45 %; p = 0.01) and previous treatment with antiresorptive (86 vs 68 %; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In Spain, a program designed to prevent secondary fragility fractures based on the collaboration between primary care and rheumatology seems effective in terms of recruitment of patients and adherence to treatment in the mid/long-term.

Meeting international standards of secondary fracture prevention: a survey on Fracture Liaison Services in the Netherlands

The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is advocated to be effective for the prevention of secondary fractures, but implementation is variable. A questionnaire based on the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) Capture the Fracture® FLS standards was used in the current study. The results showed high compliancy with the IOF standards in the Dutch responding hospitals.

INTRODUCTION

The FLS is advocated for the prevention of secondary fractures, but its implementation varies between hospitals and countries. The present survey applied the standards proposed by the IOF to evaluate the implementation of FLSs in non-university hospitals in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A questionnaire based on the IOF FLS standards was used in this study, requesting the selection, evaluation and treatment data of patients older than 50 years with a recent fracture.

RESULTS

Of 90 invited hospitals, 24 (27 %) fully responded, providing data of 24,468 consecutive patients, corresponding with 25 % of fracture patients in the Netherlands in the year 2012. After excluding skull and toe fractures and patients exceeding the upper age limits applied by individual hospitals, 11,983 patient data were available for analysis. The data showed high compliance (>90 %) for fracture patient identification, invitation for FLS, timing of assessment, identification of vertebral fractures, application of national guidelines, evaluation of secondary osteoporosis, drug initiation when indicated, communication with the general practitioner and application of follow-up strategy and 70 % for fall prevention. The response rate was on average (49 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The available data also showed that patients attending the FLSs were evaluated, treated and followed in high compliancy with the IOF standards. Some standards are open to different interpretations and may need further specification. The major shortcoming in FLS practice was that patients invited to attend the FLSs showed a low response rate. None of the hospitals achieved the IOF standard patient response rate of over 90 %.