Hip protectors are cost-effective in the prevention of hip fractures in patients with high fracture risk

Cost-effective preventive interventions are necessary for tackling the increasing number of hip fractures, which are frequently occuring as a serious consequence of osteoporosis. Several interventions have been available for preventing and treating osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to systematically review and critically appraise studies that assessed cost-effectiveness of hip protectors for the prevention of hip fractures and to investigate the effects of age, gender and residence situation on cost-effectiveness. A systematic review was conducted in order to identify economic evaluation studies examining the hip protector solely or compared to no treatment according to the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Synthesis of results was performed to observe trends between the studies. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the use of the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. A total of 15 economic evaluation studies were included for analysis. The methodological quality was high in most studies (13/15). The hip protector was solely evaluated in three studies and within 12 other studies compared with no intervention. All studies that investigated the cost-effectiveness in long-term care facilities revealed that hip protector use is a cost-effective strategy for the prevention of hip fractures in elderly. Cost-effectiveness was also observed in two studies that provided hip protectors in a geriatric hospital ward. Four studies included both community-dwelling residents and residents living in a long-term care facility in their study. These studies showed more variability regarding cost-effectiveness. One study did not report information regarding the residence situation of their cohort, but also observed cost-effectiveness. In conclusion, this review suggests that hip protectors are a cost-effective approach in the prevention of hip fractures in populations with high risk of hip fractures especially in long-term care facilities and a geriatric ward in a hospital.

Dysplasia epiphysealis hemimelica: a histological comparative study with osteochondromas

PURPOSE

Dysplasia epiphysealis hemimelica (DEH) is a rare developmental disorder resulting in epiphyseal overgrowth. Based on histological appearance, it is often described as an osteochondroma or osteochondroma-like lesion, although clinical differences exist between DEH and osteochondromas. The aim of this study was to test whether DEH and osteochondromas are histologically identical diseases.

METHODS

Tissue samples of two age- and gender-matched cases with DEH and hereditary multiple exostoses were histologically compared. Sections were stained with Safranin-O for detection of proteoglycans and immunohistochemistry was performed for detection of collagen type II, collagen type X as a marker of hypertrophic chondrocytes and Sox9 as a marker of proliferative chondrocytes. Due to the rarity, descriptions of the included DEH patients were outlined.

RESULTS

Histologically, chondrocyte clusters in a fibrillary matrix, a thick disorganised cartilage cap and ossification centres with small amounts of unabsorbed cartilage, were observed in DEH. In contrast, cartilage organisation of osteochondromas displays characteristics of the normal growth plate. Collagen type II was clearly detected in the cartilaginous extracellular matrix in osteochondromas, while weak expression was observed in DEH. Collagen type X was not detected in DEH, while expressed in the matrix surrounding hypertrophic chondrocytes in osteochondromas. Sox9 staining was positive in hypertrophic chondrocytes in osteochondromas, while expressed in nuclei of chondrocyte clusters in DEH.

CONCLUSION

Both morphological and immunohistological differences were observed in histological sections of DEH and osteochondromas. These results support the previously identified clinical, radiological and genetic differences and imply a different aetiology between DEH and osteochondroma formation.