Three-year outcomes of a fracture liaison service model at a university-based tertiary care hospital in Thailand

Fragility hip fracture (FHF) is a serious complication of osteoporosis. A fracture liaison service (FLS) is crucial in preventing FHF. Our retrospective data of 489 patients with FHF and 3-year follow-ups demonstrated that the FLS improved functional outcomes. Our study's mortality rates were lower than in other published series.

PURPOSE

This study assessed the 3-year outcomes after fragility hip fracture (FHF) treatment by a multidisciplinary team from the Siriraj Fracture Liaison Service (Si-FLS). The review investigated the administration rates of anti-osteoporosis medication, refracture, and mortality; activities of daily living; mobility; and health-related quality of life.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of the records of Si-FLS patients given FHF treatment between June 2016 and October 2018. The outcomes were evaluated at 3 time points: before discharge, and 1 and 3 years after treatment.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 489 patients (average age, 78). The mortality and refracture rates at 1 year after hip fracture were 13.9% and 1.6%, respectively. At the 3-year follow-up, both rates were higher (20.4% and 5.7%, respectively). The Barthel Index and EuroQoL Visual Analogue Scale had risen to a plateau at the 1-year follow-up and remained stable to the 3-year follow-up. One year after treatment, approximately 60% of the patients could ambulate outdoors, and the proportion remained steady until the 3-year follow-up. There was no difference in the 1- and 3-year follow-up anti-osteoporosis medication administration rates (approximately 40%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the benefits of having a multidisciplinary FLS care team to manage older people with FHF. An FLS improves the care of patients with FHF and the social support of caregivers and relatives. The FLS maintained the functional outcomes of the patients through 3 years of postfracture treatment.

The Importance of Fracture Liaison Services to the Healthcare System: A Review

Osteoporosis is an important public health concern, with secondary fragility fractures carrying a poor prognosis. The role of a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is to identify fragility fracture patients via investigation and risk assessment. This serves to address the osteoporosis treatment care gap that exists where the majority of patients with a new fragility fracture over 50-years-old fail to receive a bone mass density (BMD) scan and osteoporosis treatment, ultimately receiving inadequate care. Osteoporosis medication is effective in reducing secondary fragility fractures. However, treatment adherence poses a problem. The FLS serves to prevent more serious secondary fragility fractures such as hip fractures. This minimises operative costs and the cost of postoperative care and results in fewer secondary care and care home admissions, increasing healthcare savings. Implementation of the FLS is effective in increasing investigation, treatment initiation, and adherence, with a corresponding decrease in refracture rate and mortality. This paper aims to evaluate the previous osteoporosis treatment care gap, the effectiveness of osteoporosis medications currently available, and finally, the cost and clinical effectiveness of the FLS serving as a secondary prevention tool.

Real-world cost-effectiveness analysis of the fracture liaison services model of care for hip fracture in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

This study was to perform an economic evaluation to understand clinical outcomes and health resource use between hip fracture patients receiving hospital-based postfracture fracture liaison service (FLS) care and those receiving usual care (UC) in Taiwan.

METHODS

This cohort study included hospital-based data of 174 hip fracture patients who received FLS care (FLS group) from National Taiwan University Hospital, and 1697 propensity score-matched patients who received UC (UC group) of National Health Insurance claim-based data. Two groups had similar baseline characteristics but differed in hip fracture care after propensity score matching. Clinical outcomes included refracture-free survival (RFS), hip-refracture-free survival (HRFS), and overall survival (OS). Health resource use included inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy costs within 2 years follow-up after the index of hip fracture. The economic evaluation of the FLS model was analyzed using the net monetary benefit regression framework based on the National Health Insurance perspective.

RESULTS

The FLS group had longer RFS than the UC group, with an adjusted difference of 44.3 days (95% confidence interval: 7.2-81.4 days). Two groups did not differ in inpatient and outpatient costs during follow-up, but the FLS group had a higher expenditure than the UC group on osteoporosis-related medication. The probability of FLS being cost-effective was >80% and of increasing RFS, HRFS, and OS was 95%, 81%, and 80%, respectively, when the willingness-to-pay threshold was >USD 65/gross domestic product per day.

CONCLUSION

FLS care was cost-effective in reducing refracture occurrence days for patients initially diagnosed with hip fractures.

Vertebral fracture: epidemiology, impact and use of DXA vertebral fracture assessment in fracture liaison services

Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for imaging of the lateral spine during DXA-measurement of the spine and hips may contribute to detect vertebral fractures. We advocate performing a VFA in all patients with a recent fracture visiting a fracture liaison service (FLS). Fracture liaison services (FLS) are important service models for delivering secondary fracture prevention for older adults presenting with a fragility fracture. While commonly age, clinical risk factors (including fracture site and number of prior fracture) and BMD play a crucial role in determining fracture risk and indications for treatment with antiosteoporosis medications, prevalent vertebral fractures usually remain undetected. However, vertebral fractures are important independent risk factors for future vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. A development of the DXA technology, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), allows for assessment of the lateral spine during the regular DXA bone mineral density measurement of the lumbar spine and hips. Recent approaches to the stratification of antiosteoporosis medication type according to baseline fracture risk, and differences by age in the indication for treatment by prior fracture mean that additional information from VFA may influence initiation and type of treatment. Furthermore, knowledge of baseline vertebral fractures allows reliable definition of incident vertebral fracture events during treatment, which may modify the approach to therapy. In this manuscript, we will discuss the epidemiology and clinical significance of vertebral fractures, the different methods of detecting vertebral fractures, and the rationale for, and implications of, use of VFA routinely in FLS. • Vertebral fracture assessment is a tool available on modern DXA instruments and has proven ability to detect vertebral fractures, the majority of which occur without a fall and without the signs and symptoms of an acute fracture. • Most osteoporosis guidelines internationally suggest that treatment with antiosteoporosis medications should be considered for older individuals (e.g., 65 years +) with a recent low trauma fracture without the need for DXA. • Younger individuals postfracture may be risk-assessed on the basis of FRAX® probability including DXA and associated treatment thresholds. • Future fracture risk is markedly influenced by both site, number, severity, and recency of prior fracture; awareness of baseline vertebral fractures facilitates definition of true incident vertebral fracture events occurring during antiosteoporosis treatment. • Detection of previously clinically silent vertebral fractures, defining site of prior fracture, might alter treatment decisions in younger or older FLS patients, consistent with recent IOF-ESCEO guidance on baseline-risk-stratified therapy, and provides a reliable baseline from which to define new, potentially therapy-altering, vertebral fracture events.