'If it was osteoporosis, I would have really hurt myself.' Ambiguity about osteoporosis and osteoporosis care despite a screening programme to educate fragility fracture patients

Bisphosphonate alternative regimens for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: BLAST-OFF, a mixed-methods study

Background

Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both treatment compliance and persistence) is poor. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which can be given intravenously and have been shown to improve long-term adherence. However, the most clinically effective and cost-effective alternative bisphosphonate regimen remains unclear. What is the most cost-effective bisphosphonate in clinical trials may not be the most cost-effective or acceptable to patients in everyday clinical practice.

Objectives

1. Explore patient, clinician and stakeholder views, experiences and preferences of alendronate compared to alternative bisphosphonates. 2. Update and refine the 2016 systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of bisphosphonates, and estimate the value of further research into their benefits. 3. Undertake stakeholder/consensus engagement to identify important research questions and further rank research priorities.

Methods

The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: • Stage 1A - we elicited patient and healthcare experiences to understand their preferences of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. This was undertaken by performing a systematic review and framework synthesis of qualitative studies, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews with participants. • Stage 1B - we updated and expanded the existing Health Technology Assessment systematic review and clinical and cost-effectiveness model, incorporating a more comprehensive review of treatment efficacy, safety, side effects, compliance and long-term persistence. • Stage 2 - we identified and ranked further research questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonates.

Results

Patients and healthcare professionals identified a number of challenges in adhering to bisphosphonate medication, balancing the potential for long-term risk reduction against the work involved in adhering to oral alendronate. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable, with such regimens perceived to be more straightforward to engage in, although a portion of patients taking alendronate were satisfied with their current treatment. Intravenous zoledronate was found to be the most effective, with higher adherence rates compared to the other bisphosphonates, for reducing the risk of fragility fracture. However, oral bisphosphonates are more cost-effective than intravenous zoledronate due to the high cost of zoledronate administration in hospital. The importance of including patients and healthcare professionals when setting research priorities is recognised. Important areas for research were related to patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, how to optimise long-term care and the cost-effectiveness of delivering zoledronate in an alternative, non-hospital setting.

Conclusions

Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients and found to be the most effective bisphosphonate and with greater adherence; however, the cost-effectiveness relative to oral alendronate is limited by its higher zoledronate hospital administration costs.

Future work

Further research is needed to support people to make decisions influencing treatment selection, effectiveness and optimal long-term care, together with the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intravenous zoledronate administered in a non-hospital (community) setting.

Limitations

Lack of clarity and limitations in the many studies included in the systematic review may have under-interpreted some of the findings relating to effects of bisphosphonates.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN10491361.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127550) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The experience of feeling old after a fragility fracture

BACKGROUND

There has been little exploration of the effect of fragility fractures on patient perceptions of their age. The common assumption is that fractures "happen to old people". In individuals with a fragility fracture, our objective was to explore the experience of feeling old after sustaining a fragility fracture.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data from 145 community-dwelling women and men participating in six qualitative primary studies was conducted relying on a phenomenological approach. Participants were English-speaking, 45 years and older, who had sustained a recent fragility fracture or reported a history of previous fragility fractures. Data for the analysis included direct statements about feeling old as well any discussions relevant to age post-fracture.

RESULTS

We highlight two interpretations based on how individuals with a history of fragility fracture talked about age: (1) Participants described feeling old post-fracture. Several participants made explicit statements about being "old". However, the majority of participants discussed experiences post-fracture that implied that they felt old and had resigned themselves to being old. This appeared to entail a shift in thinking and perception of self that was permanent and had become a part of their identity; and (2) Perceptions of increasing age after sustaining a fracture were reinforced by health care providers, family, and friends.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings challenge the notion that fractures "happen to old people" and suggest that fractures can make people feel old. Careful consideration of how bone health messages are communicated to patients post-fracture by health care providers is warranted. (Word Count: 248).

Perspectives of patients with depression and chronic pain about bone health after a fragility fracture: A qualitative study

Background

Compromised bone health is often associated with depression and chronic pain.

Objective

To examine: (1) the experience of existing depression and chronic nonfracture pain in patients with a fragility fracture; and (2) the effects of the fracture on depression and pain.

Design

A phenomenological study guided by Giorgi's analytical procedures.

Setting and Participants

Fracture patients who reported taking prescription medication for one or more comorbidities, excluding compromised bone health.

Main Variables Studied

Patients were interviewed within 6 weeks of their fracture, and 1 year later. Interview questions addressed the recent fracture and patients' experience with bone health and their other health conditions, such as depression and chronic pain, including the medications taken for these conditions.

Results

Twenty‐six patients (5 men, 21 women) aged 45–84 years old with hip (n = 5) and nonhip (n = 21) fractures were recruited. Twenty‐one participants reported depression and/or chronic nonfracture pain, of which seven reported having both depression and chronic pain. Two themes were consistent, based on our analysis: (1) depression and chronic pain overshadowed attention to bone health; and (2) the fracture exacerbated reported experiences of existing depression and chronic pain.

Conclusion

Experiences with depression and pain take priority over bone health and may worsen as a result of the fracture. Health care providers treating fragility fractures might ask patients about depression and pain and take appropriate steps to address patients' more general emotional and physical state.

Patient Contribution

A patient representative was involved in the study conception, data interpretation and manuscript writing.

Acceptability of bisphosphonates among patients, clinicians and managers: a systematic review and framework synthesis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the acceptability of different bisphosphonate regimens for the treatment of osteoporosis among patients, clinicians and managers, payers and academics.

DESIGN

A systematic review of primary qualitative studies. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 2019. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of full-articles selected for inclusion were performed independently by two authors. A framework synthesis was applied to extracted data based on the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). The TFA includes seven domains relating to sense-making, emotions, opportunity costs, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality and self-efficacy. Confidence in synthesis findings was assessed.

SETTING

Any developed country healthcare setting.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients, healthcare professionals, managers, payers and academics.

INTERVENTION

Experiences and views of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included, mostly describing perceptions of oral bisphosphonates. We identified, with high confidence, how patients and healthcare professionals make sense (coherence) of bisphosphonates by balancing perceptions of need against concerns, how uncertainty prevails about bisphosphonate perceived effectiveness and a number of individual and service factors that have potential to increase self-efficacy in recommending and adhering to bisphosphonates. We identified, with moderate confidence, that bisphosphonate taking induces concern, but has the potential to engender reassurance, and that both side effects and special instructions for taking oral bisphosphonates can result in treatment burden. Finally, we identified with low confidence that multimorbidity plays a role in people's perception of bisphosphonate acceptability.

CONCLUSION

By using the lens of acceptability, our findings demonstrate with high confidence that a theoretically informed, whole-system approach is necessary to both understand and improve adherence. Clinicians and patients need supporting to understand the need for bisphosphonates, and clinicians need to clarify to patients what constitutes bisphosphonate treatment success. Further research is needed to explore perspectives of male patients and those with multimorbidity receiving bisphosphonates, and patients receiving intravenous treatment.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019143526.

Knowledge, beliefs, and concerns about bone health from a systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies

Background

Patients with low bone density or osteoporosis need information for effective prevention or disease management, respectively. However, patients may not be getting enough information from their primary care providers or other sources. Inadequate disease information leaves patients ill-informed and creates misconceptions and unnecessary concerns about the disease.

Objective

We systematically reviewed and synthesized the available literature to determine patient knowledge, beliefs, and concerns about osteoporosis and identify potential gaps in knowledge.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted for full-text qualitative studies addressing understanding, literacy, and/or perceptions about osteoporosis and its management, using Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ERIC, PsychINFO, Psyc Behav Sci Collec, and PubMed, from inception through September 2016. Studies were selected by two reviewers, assessed for quality, and themes extracted using the Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction tool. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes.

Results

Twenty-five studies with a total of 757 participants (including 105 men) were selected for analysis out of 1031 unique citations. Selected studies were from Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Four main themes emerged: inadequate knowledge, beliefs and misconceptions, concerns about osteoporosis, and lack of information from health care providers. Participants had inadequate knowledge about osteoporosis and were particularly uninformed about risk factors, causes, treatment, and prevention. Areas of concern for participants included diagnosis, medication side effects, and inadequate information from primary care providers.

Conclusion

Although there was general awareness of osteoporosis, many misconceptions and concerns were evident. Education on bone health needs to reinforce areas of knowledge and address deficits, misconceptions, and concerns.

Osteoporosis prevention: Where are the barriers to improvement in French general practitioners? A qualitative study

Background

Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis and treatment remain suboptimal.

Objectives

We conducted a qualitative study to understand barriers towards care initiation and levers to improve awareness and management of osteoporosis among general practitioners (GPs).

Methods

Semi-structured face-to face interviews were conducted with 16 GPs in the Rhône area of France to explore their knowledge and representations regarding osteoporosis. A thematic analysis of transcripts was performed to identify GPs’ perceptions on osteoporosis diagnosis, prevention, treatment and patients’ expectations.

Results

Interviewed GPs considered osteoporosis far less important than other chronic diseases. They questioned whether osteoporosis was a disease or normal aspect of ageing. They associated osteoporosis with fragility fractures, female sex, menopause, and old age but rarely with male sex. They regarded bone mineral density as the reference diagnostic test, but certain GPs indicated that they had difficulties to interpret the results and to know when to prescribe. Biphosphonates were mentioned as the reference treatment but some GPs expressed distrust about osteoporosis medications. Most of them did not think to screen for osteoporosis risk factors in their patients in a preventive medical approach. They mentioned the lack of time to implement prevention and were expecting clear and pragmatic guidelines, as well as information campaigns in general population to increase awareness on osteoporosis.

Conclusion

GPs tended to underestimate the salience of osteoporosis. Clear recommendations, better awareness of GPs and the general population could improve osteoporosis prevention and treatment.

Metasynthesis of Patient Attitudes Toward Bone Densitometry

BACKGROUND

Bone densitometry (e.g., dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or "DXA") is strongly associated with osteoporosis treatment; however, rates of DXA are low. While studies have demonstrated a continued need for primary care provider education on the role of DXA in preventive care, little is known about the role of patient attitudes toward DXA. This review's purpose is to synthesize the evidence about the effects of patient perceptions and experiences of DXA on osteoporosis prevention.

METHODS

A metasynthesis was conducted of English language, peer-reviewed publications, searching relevant databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts. Identified articles' quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Checklist, and an iterative process of data evaluation, integration, and synthesis was used to develop the findings.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles from ten studies were identified, composing an aggregated sample of 265 people (231 women). Participant attitudes toward screening ranged from receptive to ambivalent to concerned about results. Participants' understandings of DXA and its role in clinical care were limited. Knowledge of osteoporosis was also partial and influenced by lay sources, the media, and health care providers. Primary care providers strongly influenced participant behavior, especially if participants had a more passive approach to health care. Participants reported less concern about expected barriers of health care access and cost.

CONCLUSION

Minimal knowledge exists of patient perceptions and experiences of DXA among those who are fracture naïve: Prior research has focused primarily on secondary fracture prevention contexts. Our metasynthesis reveals patients' significant reliance, given their limited risk appraisal and knowledge, upon primary care providers in decision-making. We urge colleagues to conduct qualitative research on DXA barriers among general primary care population in order to facilitate health care delivery systems better equipped to diagnose and treat patients before their first fracture.

Factors related to intentional non-initiation of bisphosphonate treatment in patients with a high fracture risk in primary care: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Adherence to osteoporosis treatment is crucial for good treatment effects. However, adherence has been shown to be poor and a substantial part of the patients don't even initiate treatment. This study aimed to gain insight into the considerations of both osteoporosis patients and general practitioners (GP) concerning intentional non-initiation of bisphosphonate treatment.

METHODS

Osteoporosis patients and GPs were recruited from the SALT Osteoporosis Study and a transmural fracture liaison service, both carried out in the Netherlands. Using questionnaires, we identified non-starters and starters of bisphosphonate treatment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain a detailed overview of all considerations until saturation of the data was reached. Starters were asked to reflect on the considerations that were brought forward by the non-starters. Interviews were open coded and the codes were classified into main themes and subthemes using an inductive approach.

RESULTS

16 non-starters, 10 starters, and 13 GPs were interviewed. We identified three main themes: insufficient medical advice, attitudes towards medication use including concerns about side effects, and disease awareness. From patients' as well as GPs' perspective, insufficient or ambiguous information from the GP influenced the decision of the non-starters to not start bisphosphonates. In contrast, starters were either properly informed, or they collected information themselves. Patients' aversion towards medication, fear of side effects, and a low risk perception also contributed to not starting the medication, whereas starters were aware of their fracture risk and were confident of the outcome of the treatment. Concerns about osteoporosis treatment and its side effects were also expressed by several GPs. Some GPs appeared to have a limited understanding of the current osteoporosis guidelines and the indications for treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Many reasons we found for not starting bisphosphonate treatment were related to the patients or the GPs themselves being insufficiently informed. Attitudes of the GPs were shown to play a role in the decision of patients not to start treatment. Interventions need to be developed that are aimed at GPs, and at education of patients.

Expressed information needs of patients with osteoporosis and/or fragility fractures: a systematic review

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.

Systematic scoping review of patients' perceived needs of health services for osteoporosis

Health service planners, administrators and providers need to understand the patients' perspective of health services related to osteoporosis to optimise health outcomes. The aims of this study were to systematically identify and review the literature regarding patients' perceived health service needs relating to osteoporosis and osteopenia. A systematic scoping review was performed of publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO (1990-2016). Descriptive data regarding study design and methodology were extracted and risk of bias assessed. Aggregates of patients' perceived needs of osteoporosis health services were categorised. Thirty-three studies (19 quantitative and 14 qualitative) from 1027 were relevant. The following areas of perceived need emerged: (1) patients sought healthcare from doctors to obtain information and initiate management. They were dissatisfied with poor communication, lack of time and poor continuity of care. (2) Patients perceived a role for osteoporosis pharmacotherapy but were concerned about medication administration and adverse effects. (3) Patients believed that exercise and vitamin supplementation were important, but there is a lack of data examining the needs for other non-pharmacological measures such as smoking cessation and alcohol. (4) Patients wanted diagnostic evaluation and ongoing surveillance of their bone health. This review identified patients' needs for better communication with their healthcare providers. It also showed that a number of important cornerstones of therapy for osteoporosis, such as pharmacotherapy and exercise, are identified as important by patients, as well as ongoing surveillance of bone health. Understanding patients' perceived needs and aligning them with responsive and evidence-informed service models are likely to optimise patient outcomes.

Understanding fragility fracture patients' decision-making process regarding bisphosphonate treatment

We aimed to understand how patients 50 years and older decided to persist with or stop osteoporosis (OP) treatment. Processes related to persisting with or stopping OP treatments are complex and dynamic. The severity and risks and harms related to untreated clinical OP and the favorable benefit-to-risk profile for OP treatments should be reinforced.

INTRODUCTION

Older adults with fragility fracture and clinical OP are at high risk of recurrent fracture, and treatment reduces this risk by 50 %. However, only 20 % of fracture patients are treated for OP and half stop treatment within 1 year. We aimed to understand how older patients with new fractures decided to persist with or stop OP treatment over 1 year.

METHODS

We conducted a grounded theory study of patients 50 years and older with upper extremity fracture who started bisphosphonates and then reported persisting with or stopping treatment at 1 year. We used theoretical sampling to identify patients who could inform emerging concepts until data saturation was achieved and analyzed these data using constant comparison.

RESULTS

We conducted 21 interviews with 12 patients. Three major themes emerged. First, patients perceived OP was not a serious health condition and considered its impact negligible. Second, persisters and stoppers differed in weighting the risks vs benefits of treatments, where persisters perceived less risk and more benefit. Persisters considered treatment "required" while stoppers often deemed treatment "optional." Third, patients could change treatment status even 1-year post-fracture because they re-evaluated severity and impact of OP vs risks and benefits of treatments over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The processes and reasoning related to persisting with or stopping OP treatments post-fracture are complex and dynamic. Our findings suggest two areas of leverage for healthcare providers to reinforce to improve persistence: (1) the severity and risks and harms related to untreated clinical OP and (2) the favorable benefit-to-risk profile for OP treatments.

Qualitative Insights from the Osteoporosis Research: A Narrative Review of the Literature

Purpose. Much of the research on osteoporosis has been generated quantitatively. However, the qualitative osteoporosis literature provides valuable information on patient and clinician experiences and perspectives, informing the design and implementation of health research and healthcare services. To identify knowledge gaps and inform the design of future qualitative research, a narrative review was conducted to consolidate and synthesize the existing insights available within the qualitative osteoporosis research. Methods. Search terms reflecting the domains of osteoporosis and qualitative research were entered into the Scopus database to generate a comprehensive survey of qualitative research in the area of osteoporosis. Articles were thematically analysed and the results are presented in the form of a narrative review. Results. Forty-four articles were included in the narrative review. Qualitative research in the field of osteoporosis research can be summarized by 3 thematic areas: the meaning of osteoporosis for patients and the public, the lived experience of an osteoporosis diagnosis, and the programmatic approach to osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Conclusions. Qualitative studies provide clinically valuable insights in how osteoporosis is conceptualized and managed and programmatic aspects of osteoporosis treatment. The findings of this narrative review suggest the need for balance between presenting osteoporosis as a serious health condition and producing unwarranted anxiety and inactivity so as to ensure the best possible outcomes for individuals with osteoporosis.

A qualitative systematic review of patients' experience of osteoporosis using meta-ethnography

We aimed to systematically review qualitative studies exploring the experience of living with osteoporosis to develop new conceptual understanding. We identified themes about the invisibility/visibility of osteoporosis, the experience of uncertainty of living with osteoporosis (OP) and living with an ageing body and the place of gender.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to systematically review the body of qualitative studies exploring the experience of living with either osteoporosis or osteopenia and to use meta-ethnography to develop new conceptual understanding.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed and integrated the findings of qualitative research from four bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Psychinfo) to September 2015 in order to increase our conceptual understanding of the lived experience of osteoporosis and osteopenia. Articles were appraised for quality; each was independently read by two researchers to identify concepts which were compared and developed into a conceptual model.

RESULTS

Our findings demonstrate that coming to terms with a diagnosis of osteoporosis is linked to its relative visibility or invisibility. For some, OP has not become manifest and self-identity is intact (biographical integrity). For others, OP is profoundly manifest and self-identity is no long intact (biographical fracture). We also demonstrate that overwhelming uncertainty pervades the experience of OP. Our final theme demonstrates how the experience of OP is set within a cultural context with certain views about ageing and gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Our synthesis has highlighted the wealth of qualitative data about osteoporosis and osteopenia. Despite the increasing body of literature on the subject, there remains a need to adjust our interactions with patients. This will allow clinicians to understand how patients can be helped to receive and understand their diagnosis and move forward in partnership with healthcare providers to promote optimal management of the disease.

Patient perceptions of provider barriers to post-fracture secondary prevention

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Anti-osteoporotic therapy in Denmark--predictors and demographics of poor refill compliance and poor persistence

In this study of 100,949 new users of oral bisphosphonates age ≥ 35 years, "early quitters" were found to differ from others with poor refill compliance in terms of socioeconomic, demographic, and treatment-related characteristics. New risk factors for poor compliance and persistence were identified.

INTRODUCTION

Poor compliance with anti-osteoporotic therapy is an on-going worldwide challenge. In this study, we hypothesized that "early quitters" differ in socioeconomics, demographics, co-medications, and comorbid conditions from other patients with low compliance.

METHODS

The study was a register-based nationwide cohort study of anti-osteoporotic therapy comprising 100,949 men and women. Statistical analysis including backward stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to explain causes of treatment failure and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to estimate persistence of treatment.

RESULTS

It was noted that 56.6 % of the patients were persistent and compliant, 4.7 % of the patients were persistent but "low compliant" while 38.7 % of the patients were "early quitters". "Early quitters" were found to differ in socioeconomics from "low compliant" patients. Differences concerning increased risk of "early quitters" were associated with high household income, subjects' age 71.9-79 years, living in the countryside or village, prior treatment with analgesics and anti-parkinson drugs, and dementia. Differences concerning decreased risk of "early quitters" were associated with male, living in an apartment, children living at home, living close to a university hospital, anti-osteoporotic therapy other than alendronate, number of drugs especially above three, pulmonary disease, collagen disease.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest a need for improved support for patients to facilitate the interpretation of the disease and the perception of the benefits and risks of treatment-to reduce the risk of "early quitters". We were able to identify new risk groups that may be candidates for targeted actions.

Patients reject the concept of fragility fracture--a new understanding based on fracture patients' communication

We examined patients' communication about fragility fractures to gain insight into why patients do not connect fractures to bone health. The term "fragility" fracture was a misnomer to patients who perceived the event as physically and emotionally traumatic. Improved communication about such fractures could facilitate awareness of bone health.

INTRODUCTION

We examined patients' communication about fragility fractures to gain insight into why patients do not perceive the connection between their fracture and low bone mass.

METHODS

A descriptive phenomenological (qualitative) study was conducted. During face-to-face interviews, the participants described the experience of their fracture in detail and the circumstances surrounding the fracture. Data analysis was guided by Giorgi's methodology. English-speaking male and female patients aged 65+ years and "high" risk for future fracture were eligible and screened for osteoporosis through an established screening program at an urban teaching hospital.

RESULTS

We recruited 30 participants (9 males, 21 females), aged 65-88, who presented with a hip (n = 11), wrist (n = 11), shoulder (n = 6), or other (n = 2) fracture. Ten of the 30 fractures occurred inside the home and the remaining fractures occurred outside the home. Sustaining a fragility fracture was perceived as a traumatic event, both physically and emotionally. In general, participants used forceful, action-oriented words and referred to hard surfaces to describe the experience. Explanations for the fracture, other than bone quality, were often reported, especially that falls were "freak" or "fluke" events. Patients who sustained a fracture under more mundane circumstances seemed more likely to perceive a connection between the fracture and their bone health.

CONCLUSIONS

The term fragility fracture was a misnomer for many older adults. By reexamining how this term is communicated to fracture patients, health care providers may better facilitate patients' awareness of bone health.

Decision to take osteoporosis medication in patients who have had a fracture and are 'high' risk for future fracture: a qualitative study

Background

Patients' values and preferences are fundamental tenets of evidence-based practice, yet current osteoporosis (OP) clinical guidelines pay little attention to these issues in therapeutic decision making. This may be in part due to the fact that few studies have examined the factors that influence the initial decision to take OP medication. The purpose of our study was to examine patients' experiences with the decision to take OP medication after they sustained a fracture.

Methods

A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted with outpatients identified in a university teaching hospital fracture clinic OP program. Individuals aged 65+ who had sustained a fragility fracture within 5 years, were 'high risk' for future fracture, and were prescribed OP medication were eligible. Analysis of interview data was guided by Giorgi's methodology.

Results

21 patients (6 males, 15 females) aged 65-88 years participated. All participants had low bone mass; 9 had OP. Fourteen patients were taking a bisphosphonate while 7 patients were taking no OP medications. For 12 participants, the decision to take OP medication occurred at the time of prescription and involved minimal contemplation (10/12 were on medication). These patients made their decision because they liked/trusted their health care provider. However, 4/10 participants in this group indicated their OP medication-taking status might change. For the remaining 9 patients, the decision was more difficult (4/9 were on medication). These patients were unconvinced by their health care provider, engaged in risk-benefit analyses using other information sources, and were concerned about side effects; 7/9 patients indicated that their OP medication-taking status might change at a later date.

Conclusions

Almost half of our older patients who had sustained a fracture found the decision to take OP medication a difficult one. In general, the decision was not considered permanent. Health care providers should be aware of their potential role in patients' decisions and monitor patients' decisions over time.

Adherence to osteoporosis drugs and fracture prevention: no evidence of healthy adherer bias in a frail cohort of seniors

We examined new users of osteoporosis drugs among seniors in Pennsylvania and found no evidence of healthy adherer bias on observed associations between adherence to treatment and non-vertebral fracture risk; we document fracture reduction with better adherence to bisphosphonates, yet no fracture reduction with better adherence to calcitonin or raloxifene.

INTRODUCTION

We examined the potential for "healthy adherer bias" when studying the effects of adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy on fracture risk. Based on clinical trial evidence, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, and raloxifene reduce vertebral fracture risk; yet only bisphosphonates are documented to reduce non-vertebral fracture risk.

METHODS

This is a cohort study of older women in Pennsylvania who initiated osteoporosis drugs between 1995 and 2005. We included new users of bisphosphonates, calcitonin, and raloxifene. Adherence was categorized based on a measure of compliance as high [proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 80%], intermediate (50% < PDC < 80%), or low (PDC ≤ 50%) according to a 180-day ascertainment period. Non-vertebral fracture rates within 365 days after the ascertainment period were compared between adherence categories (reference = low) using Cox proportional hazard models and adjusting for fracture risk factors. Primary and secondary prevention cohorts were examined separately. Adherence to calcitonin and raloxifene were control analyses.

RESULTS

We found little difference in fracture rates between levels of adherence to calcitonin, bisphosphonates for primary prevention, or raloxifene for secondary prevention. We document lower fracture rates among high versus low adherent bisphosphonate users for secondary prevention (HR = 0.53, 95%CI = 0.38-0.74) and higher fracture rates among high versus low adherent raloxifene users for primary prevention (HR = 2.01, 95%CI = 1.04-3.87).

CONCLUSIONS

We document little evidence of healthy adherer bias when studying the association between better adherence to osteoporosis drugs and fracture risk reduction, with only better adherence to bisphosphonates reducing fracture risk. The higher fracture risk among highly adherent raloxifene users for primary prevention is likely due to residual confounding.

Measuring and improving adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Osteoporosis is a major public health issue resulting in considerable fracture-related morbidity. Although effective treatment exists, adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is suboptimal and linked to reduced drug effectiveness. In this paper, we review methods of measuring and improving adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most patients will stop osteoporosis pharmacotherapy, yet the majority who discontinue will reinitiate treatment after an extended gap. The key to improving adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is to reduce the number and length of gaps in treatment. Multifaceted and individualized interventions may help to improve adherence. New strategies aimed at identifying patients likely to stop therapy may also facilitate the development of targeted interventions.

SUMMARY

Adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is suboptimal with short periods of persistence and lengthy gaps in therapy. Regular communication regarding the importance of continued therapy is critical. More research to help identify risk profiles of patients likely to become nonadherent, targeted multifaceted interventions to maximize adherence to therapy, and data to support when patients may safely consider a physician directed drug holiday is needed.