Dataset Information

Fracture risk assessment in long-term care: a survey of long-term care physicians.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The majority of frail elderly who live in long-term care (LTC) are not treated for osteoporosis despite their high risk for fragility fractures. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis provide guidance for the management of individuals 50 years and older at risk for fractures, however, they cannot benefit LTC residents if physicians perceive barriers to their application. Our objectives are to explore current practices to fracture risk assessment by LTC physicians and describe barriers to applying the recently published Osteoporosis Canada practice guidelines for fracture assessment and prevention in LTC.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with the Ontario Long-Term Care Physicians Association using an online questionnaire. The survey included questions that addressed members' attitudes, knowledge, and behaviour with respect to fracture risk assessment in LTC. Closed-ended responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic framework analysis for open-ended responses.

Results

We contacted 347 LTC physicians; 25% submitted completed surveys (81% men, mean age 60 (Standard Deviation [SD] 11) years, average 32 [SD 11] years in practice). Of the surveyed physicians, 87% considered prevention of fragility fractures to be important, but a minority (34%) reported using validated fracture risk assessment tools, while 33% did not use any. Clinical risk factors recommended by the OC guidelines for assessing fracture risk considered applicable included; glucocorticoid use (99%), fall history (93%), age (92%), and fracture history (91%). Recommended clinical measurements considered applicable included: weight (84%), thyroid-stimulating hormone (78%) and creatinine (73%) measurements, height (61%), and Get-Up-and-Go test (60%). Perceived barriers to assessing fracture risk included difficulty acquiring necessary information, lack of access to tests (bone mineral density, x-rays) or obtaining medical history; resource constraints, and a sentiment that assessing fracture risk is futile in this population because of short life expectancy and polypharmacy.

Conclusion

Perceived barriers to fracture risk assessment and osteoporosis management in LTC have not changed recently, contributing in part to the ongoing care gap in osteoporosis management. Our findings highlight the importance to adapt guidelines to be applicable to the LTC environment, and to develop partnerships with stakeholders to facilitate their use in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Wall M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3853074 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fracture risk assessment in long-term care: a survey of long-term care physicians.

Wall Michelle M Lohfeld Lynne L Giangregorio Lora L Ioannidis George G Kennedy Courtney C CC Moser Andrea A Papaioannou Alexandra A Morin Suzanne N SN

BMC geriatrics 20131018

<h4>Background</h4>The majority of frail elderly who live in long-term care (LTC) are not treated for osteoporosis despite their high risk for fragility fractures. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis provide guidance for the management of individuals 50 years and older at risk for fractures, however, they cannot benefit LTC residents if physicians perceive barriers to their application. Our objectives are to explore current practices to fracture risk ass ...[more]

PMID: 24138565

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Characterize current practices for PICU-based rehabilitation, and physician perceptions and attitudes, barriers, resources, and outcome assessment in contemporary PICU settings. DESIGN:International, self-administered, quantitative, cross-sectional survey. SETTING:Online survey distributed from March 2017 to April 2017. PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS:Pediatric critical care physicians who subscribed to email distribution lists of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators, the Pediatric Neurocritical Care Research Group, or the Prevalence of Acute Critical Neurological Disease in Children: A Global Epidemiological Assessment study group, and visitors to the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies website. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Of the 170 subjects who began the survey, 148 completed it. Of those who completed the optional respondent information, most reported working in an academic medical setting and were located in the United States. The main findings were 1) a large majority of PICU physicians reported working in institutions with no guidelines for PICU-based rehabilitation, but expressed interest in developing and implementing such guidelines; 2) despite this lack of guidelines, an overwhelming majority of respondents reported that their current practices would involve consultation of multiple rehabilitation services for each case example provided; 3) PICU physicians believed that additional research evidence is needed to determine efficacy and optimal implementation of PICU-based rehabilitation; 4) PICU physicians reported significant barriers to implementation of PICU-based rehabilitation across centers; and 5) low routine assessment of long-term functional outcomes of PICU patients, although some centers have developed multidisciplinary follow-up programs. CONCLUSIONS:Physicians lack PICU-based rehabilitation guidelines despite great interest and current practices involving a high degree of PICU-based rehabilitation consultation. Data are needed to identify best practices and necessary resources in the delivery of ICU-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation and long-term functional outcomes assessment to optimize recovery of children and families affected by critical illness.

Project description:As clinical guidelines for cancer prevention refer individuals to primary care physicians (PCP) for risk assessment and clinical management, PCPs may be expected to play an increasing role in cancer prevention. It is crucial that PCPs are adequately supported to assess an individual's cancer risk and make appropriate recommendations. The objective of this study is to assess use, familiarity, attitude, and behaviors of PCPs regarding breast and ovarian cancer risk and prevention, to better understand the factors that influence their prescribing behaviors. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of PCPs in the United States, recruited from an opt-in healthcare provider panel. Invitations were sent in batches until the target sample size of 750 respondents (250 each for obstetrics/gynecology, internal medicine, and family medicine) was met. Self-reported use of breast/ovarian cancer risk assessments was low (34.7%-59.2%) compared with discussion of cancer family history (96.9%), breast exams (87.1%), and mammograms (92.8%). Although most respondents (48.0%-66.8%) were familiar with cancer prevention interventions, respondents who reported to be less familiar were more likely to report cautious attitudes. When presented with hypothetical cases depicting patients at different breast/ovarian cancer risks, up to 34.0% of respondents did not select any of the clinically recommended course(s) of action. This survey suggests that PCP use of breast/ovarian cancer risk assessment tools and ability to translate the perceived risks to clinical actions is variable. Improving implementation of cancer risk assessment and clinical management guidelines within primary care may be necessary to improve the appropriate prescribing of cancer prevention interventions.Prevention Relevance: Primary care physicians are becoming more involved in cancer prevention management, so it is important that cancer risk assessment and medical society guideline recommendations for cancer prevention are better integrated into primary care to improve appropriate prescribing of cancer prevention interventions and help reduce cancer risk.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasing overuse of opioids in the United States may be driven in part by physician prescribing. However, the extent to which individual physicians vary in opioid prescribing and the implications of that variation for long-term opioid use and adverse outcomes in patients are unknown.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis involving Medicare beneficiaries who had an index emergency department visit in the period from 2008 through 2011 and had not received prescriptions for opioids within 6 months before that visit. After identifying the emergency physicians within a hospital who cared for the patients, we categorized the physicians as being high-intensity or low-intensity opioid prescribers according to relative quartiles of prescribing rates within the same hospital. We compared rates of long-term opioid use, defined as 6 months of days supplied, in the 12 months after a visit to the emergency department among patients treated by high-intensity or low-intensity prescribers, with adjustment for patient characteristics.ResultsOur sample consisted of 215,678 patients who received treatment from low-intensity prescribers and 161,951 patients who received treatment from high-intensity prescribers. Patient characteristics, including diagnoses in the emergency department, were similar in the two treatment groups. Within individual hospitals, rates of opioid prescribing varied widely between low-intensity and high-intensity prescribers (7.3% vs. 24.1%). Long-term opioid use was significantly higher among patients treated by high-intensity prescribers than among patients treated by low-intensity prescribers (adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 1.37; P<0.001); these findings were consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsWide variation in rates of opioid prescribing existed among physicians practicing within the same emergency department, and rates of long-term opioid use were increased among patients who had not previously received opioids and received treatment from high-intensity opioid prescribers. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.).

Dataset Information

Fracture risk assessment in long-term care: a survey of long-term care physicians.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Fracture risk assessment in long-term care: a survey of long-term care physicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets