Clinical effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment in older patients: A fracture liaison service-based prospective study

Osteoporosis and Alzheimer´s disease (or Alzheimer´s disease and Osteoporosis)

Alzheimer's disease (AD) and osteoporosis are two diseases that mainly affect elderly people, with increases in the occurrence of cases due to a longer life expectancy. Several epidemiological studies have shown a reciprocal association between both diseases, finding an increase in incidence of osteoporosis in patients with AD, and a higher burden of AD in osteoporotic patients. This epidemiological relationship has motivated the search for molecules, genes, signaling pathways and mechanisms that are related to both pathologies. The mechanisms found in these studies can serve to improve treatments and establish better patient care protocols.

Effectiveness of fracture liaison service in reducing the risk of secondary fragility fractures in adults aged 50 and older: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To determine and appraise the certainty of fracture liaison service (FLS) in reducing the risk of secondary fragility fractures in older adults aged ≥ 50 years and to examine the nature of the FLS and the roles of various disciplines involved in the delivery of the FLS. Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and The Cochrane Library were searched from January 1st, 2010, to May 31st, 2022. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the PEDro scale for randomized trials, while the GRADE approach established the certainty of the evidence. Thirty-seven studies were identified of which 34 (91.9%) were rated as having a low risk of bias and 22 (59.5%) were meta-analyzed. Clinically important low certainty evidence at 1 year (RR 0.26, CI 0.13 to 0.52, 6 pooled studies) and moderate certainty evidence at ≥ 2 years (RR 0.68, CI 0.55 to 0.83, 13 pooled studies) indicate that the risk of secondary fragility fracture was lower in the FLS intervention compared to the non-FLS intervention. Sensitivity analyses with no observed heterogeneity confirmed these findings. This review found clinically important moderate certainty evidence showing that the risk of secondary fragility fracture was lower in the FLS intervention at ≥ 2 years. More high-quality studies in this field could improve the certainty of the evidence. Review registration: PROSPERO-CRD42021266408.

Barriers to osteoporosis management and adherence to Clinical Practice Guideline: a comparative study between tertiary East Coast hospitals and a Fracture Liaison Services (FLS)-accredited hospital in Malaysia

This study compares osteoporosis management between tertiary East Coast hospitals and a FLS-accredited hospital in Malaysia. It identifies significant barriers and highlights the superior performance of FLS in areas like timely treatment initiation and treatment monitoring. The insights are crucial for improving osteoporosis management strategies.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis management poses a substantial healthcare challenge, necessitating effective strategies and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) adherence.

METHODS

The study employed a self-administered online questionnaire via Google Forms. Orthopedic clinicians from all study sites were invited to participate via messaging platforms. A total of 135 participants completed the questionnaire and the data was proceeded to statistical analyses.

RESULTS

The study identified significant barriers, including inadequate knowledge of current osteoporosis guidelines and medications (p = 0.014), limited choice of anti-osteoporosis medication (p < 0.001), insufficient post-fracture care staff (p < 0.001), patients' financial constraints due to socioeconomic status (p = 0.027), and lack of doctor-patient time (p = 0.042). FLS demonstrated superior performance in CPG adherence in areas such as clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis without BMD assessment (p = 0.046), timely treatment initiation (p < 0.001), treatment monitoring using BMD (p = 0.004), reassessment treatment after 3-5 years of bisphosphonate therapy (p = 0.034) and considering anabolic agents in very high-risk patients (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

The findings highlight an essential opportunity for improvement and emphasize the necessity for robust strategies and strict adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG), especially within tertiary East Coast hospitals. The exemplary efficacy demonstrated by the FLS model strongly advocates for its broader integration across multiple hospitals, promising substantial advancements in osteoporotic patient care outcomes throughout Malaysia.

Efficacy and Safety of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Although a range of pharmacological interventions is available, it remains uncertain which treatment for osteoporosis is more effective. This network meta-analysis study aimed to compare different drug efficacy and safety in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Clinicaltrial.gov, Cochrane library, Google scholar were searched up to 31 October 2020. Randomized placebo-controlled trials that reported measures of bone mineral density (BMD) percentage change and/or numbers of adverse events of postmenopausal osteoporosis patients were included. Network meta-analysis was conducted using frequentist approach. Ninety-four RCTs comprising 15,776 postmenopausal osteoporosis females were included in the network meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, most interventions showed increase in BMD change. According to surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs), strontium ranelate, fluoride, and hormone replacement therapy were most effective in increasing total hip, lumbar spine, and distal radius BMD, respectively. Parathyroid hormone (PTH) was most effective in preventing new hip fracture. When taking into account all anatomic sites, bisphosphonate (BP), monoclonal antibody (mAb), and fluoride have a balanced efficacy in increasing BMD at all sites. Considering both the effectiveness of increasing BMD and preventing hip fracture, mAb, BP, and PTH are more favorable among all interventions. The treatment effects of different medications on BMD percentage change are anatomic site-dependent. After weighing anti-osteoporosis treatment efficacy against risk of complications, BP and mAb are the more favorable interventions to increase BMD at all sites and reduce the risks of hip fracture and death.

Hip Fracture Prevention in Osteoporotic Elderly and Cancer Patients: An On-Line French Survey Evaluating Current Needs

Background and objectives: Hip fracture is a major public health issue. Those fractures lead to high costs and a decrease in quality of life. A national French survey was conducted, with the objectives to firstly assess the current management of hip fracture and its prevention, both in the osteoporotic and cancer settings, and secondly to evaluate the opinions of physicians on the potential use of minimally invasive implantable devices to prevent hip fracture in alternative of surgery. Materials and methods: This national survey was conducted in France between April and July 2017. Questionnaires were sent to orthopedic surgeons, interventional radiologists, oncologists, and rheumatologists. Completed questionnaires were analyzed and compared according to two indications: orthopedics-traumatology and oncology. Factors associated with these responses were assessed using univariable analyses, based on chi-square tests or an exact Fisher test, as appropriate. Results: A total of 182 questionnaires were completed and further analyzed. Physicians have highlighted the need for a low re-fracture rate and to improve life expectancy for more than 1 year (50% for responders of the orthopedics-traumatology questionnaire and 80% for the responders interested in both indications), as well as quality of life (12.5% and 31%, respectively), but with no significant differences in the oncologic indication. Most of the experts were willing to use or prescribe implantable devices for prevention (63% in orthopedics-traumatology and 93% in oncology), although limited clinical experience (54 and 58%) and surgical risk (around 30% in each indication) were considered as limits. Conclusions: Prevention of hip fracture remains a concern for physicians. More clinical experience with implantable devices, in particular in cancer patients, is needed, but implemented in a strategy to maximize patient recovery while reducing costs.

Alarm Services as a Useful Tool for Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis in Patients with Hip Fractures: A Prospective Observational Multicenter Study

Background

Alarm services in the Order Communication System improve awareness for related physicians including orthopaedic surgeons, internal medicine doctors, and other relevent doctors. This prospective observational multicenter study was to compare the diagnostic and treatment rates of osteoporosis between an alarm service group and a no alarm service group.

Methods

From January 2017 to december 2017, The subjects included patients aged 50 years or older with hip fractures from 16 hospital-based multicenter cohorts. Among the 16 hospitals, 5 university hospitals established an alarm service for osteoporosis management (i.e., Alarm group) and 11 university hospitals did not set-up alarm services (i.e., Control group). The rate of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) test and the initiation rate of antiosteoporosis medications between the 2 groups were compared at enrollment and at 6 months follow-up.

Results

During the study period, 1,405 patients were enrolled. The DXA examination rate and initiation rate of osteoporosis treatment between the Alarm group and the Control group were 484 patients (89.8%) vs. 642 patients (74.1%) (P<0.001) and 355 patients (65.9%) versus 294 patients (33.9%) (P<0.001), respectively. At 6 months follow-up, the rate of anti-osteoporosis management between the 2 groups decreased (57.8% vs. 29.4%).

Conclusions

This prospective multicenter study demonstrates that alarm services can improve awareness of physicians, and it resulted in a significantly higher rate of examination of DXA and initiation of anti-osteoporosis medication in the Alram group. Therefore, alarm service is a simple and effective tool to increase anti-osteoporosis management as part of the fractuure liaison service in South Korea.

Effects of postoperative osteoporosis treatment on subsequent fracture and the 5-year survival rates after hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture

According to the literature, only 20-30% of patients are screened for osteoporosis after a hip fracture. Osteoporosis treatment may have a potential protective effect on the 5-year mortality rate. Our results demonstrated that 5-year survival is higher in patients who received osteoporosis treatment after hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture compared with those who did not.

PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate the status of osteoporosis treatment in patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty for an osteoporotic hip fracture and to compare subsequent fractures and the 5-year survival rates of these patients with those who did not receive the osteoporosis treatment.

METHODS

Patients > 65 years of age who underwent hemiarthroplasty for an osteoporotic hip fracture were included in this retrospective multicenter study. Patients who died within 12 months postoperative, who were lost to follow-up, and those with malignancy and secondary osteoporosis were excluded. Group I comprised patients who had no postoperative osteoporosis screening and treatment, and Group II comprised those who received the screening and treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 460 of 562 patients (82%) did not receive osteoporosis treatment after hip fracture. No significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of subsequent fracture numbers and fracture sites (p = 0.296 and 0.240, respectively). Mean 5-year survival rate was significantly higher in Group II (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, elderly patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty for an osteoporotic hip fracture were not commonly screened or treated for osteoporosis. Our results demonstrated no significant difference between the groups in terms of subsequent fracture. However, we observed a significant high 5-year survival rate among patients who received the osteoporosis treatment.