Dataset Information

Association of Osteoporosis Medication Use After Hip Fracture With Prevention of Subsequent Nonvertebral Fractures: An Instrumental Variable Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Osteoporosis medication treatment is recommended after hip fracture, yet contemporary estimates of rates of initiation and clinical benefit in the patient population receiving routine care are not well documented.

Objectives

To report osteoporosis treatment initiation rates between January 1, 2004, and September 30, 2015, and to estimate the risk reduction in subsequent nonvertebral fractures associated with treatment initiation in patients with hip fracture.

Design, setting, and participants

In this cohort study, data from a commercial insurance claims database from the United States were analyzed. Patients 50 years and older who had a hip fracture and were not receiving treatment with osteoporosis medications before their fracture were included.

Exposure

Prescription dispensing of an osteoporosis medication within 180 days of a hip fracture hospitalization.

Main outcomes and measures

Each initiation episode was matched with 10 nonuse episodes on person-time after the index hip fracture event to preclude immortal time bias and followed up for the outcome of nonvertebral fracture until change in exposure or a censoring event. An instrumental variable analysis using 2-stage residual inclusion method was conducted using calendar year, specialist access, geographical variation in prescribing patterns, and hospital preference.

Results

Among 97 169 patients with a hip fracture identified, the mean (SD) age was 80.2 (10.8) years, and 64 164 (66.0%) were women. A continuous decline over the study years was observed in osteoporosis medication initiation rates from 9.8% (95% CI, 9.0%-10.6%) in 2004 to 3.3% (95% CI, 2.9%-3.8%) in 2015. In the effectiveness analyses, the hospital preference instrumental variable had a stronger association with treatment (pseudo R2 = 0.20) than the other 3 instrumental variables (specialist access: pseudo R2 = 0.04; calendar year: pseudo R2 = 0.05; and geographic variation: pseudo R2 = 0.07). Instrumental variable analysis with hospital preference suggested a rate difference of 4.2 events (95% CI, 1.1-7.3) per 100 person-years in subsequent fractures associated with osteoporosis treatment initiation compared with nonuse in an additive hazard model.

Conclusions and relevance

Low rates of osteoporosis treatment initiation after a hip fracture in recent years were observed. Clinically meaningful reduction in subsequent nonvertebral fracture rates associated with treatment suggests that improving prescriber adherence to guidelines and patient adherence to prescribed regimens may result in notable public health benefit.

SUBMITTER: Desai RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6324295 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of bazedoxifene and oral bisphosphonates for the prevention of nonvertebral fractures (NVFs) in women with higher risk of postmenopausal osteoporosis (i.e., the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool [FRAX] score ≥ 20%), based on currently available evidence from randomized controlled trials.MethodsRandomized controlled trials evaluating the NVF relative risk reduction (RRR) with oral bisphosphonates or bazedoxifene were identified by a systematic literature review and combined by means of a network meta-analysis. A subgroup of patients with a FRAX score of 20% or more in the bazedoxifene phase III osteoporosis study was selected as the population of interest on the basis of the bazedoxifene label. In one analysis (analysis 1), the placebo response of the subgroup with a FRAX score of 20% or more was the benchmark to select comparable bisphosphonate trials. Additional analyses incorporated the aggregate data from the bisphosphonate trials with all the FRAX subgroups (analysis 2) or with the individual patient data from the bazedoxifene trial (analysis 3).ResultsNine identified bisphosphonate trials (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate; N = 23,440 patients) with a similar placebo response as observed for the subgroup of high risk patients in the bazedoxifene trial were included in analysis 1. The results of the network meta-analysis of this study set suggest that bazedoxifene is expected to have an RRR of 0.43 (95% credible interval [CrI] -0.19 to 0.72) versus alendronate, 0.58 (95% CrI 0.05-0.81) versus ibandronate, and 0.39 (95% CrI -0.29 to 0.70) versus risedronate. Analyses in which treatment effects with bisphosphonates were projected to a population with a FRAX score of 20% or more with meta-regression approaches (analysis 2 and analysis 3) provide similar findings.ConclusionBased on an indirect comparison of randomized trials, bazedoxifene is expected to have at least a comparable RRR of NVF as alendronate, ibandronate, and risedronate in women with higher risk of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Project description:BackgroundWith the aging of the world's population, the social and economic implications of osteoporotic fractures are at epidemic proportions. This study was performed to test the hypothesis that a proximal humeral fracture is an independent risk factor for a subsequent hip fracture and that the risk of the subsequent hip fracture is highest within the first five years after the humeral fracture.MethodsA cohort of 8049 older white women with no history of a hip or humeral fracture who were enrolled in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures was followed for a mean of 9.8 years. The risk of hip fracture after an incident humeral fracture was estimated with use of age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with time-varying variables; women without a humeral fracture were the reference group. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the timing between the proximal humeral and subsequent hip fracture. Risk factors were determined on the basis of a review of the current literature, and we chose the variables that were most predictive and easily ascertained in a clinical setting.ResultsThree hundred and twenty-one women sustained a proximal humeral fracture, and forty-four of them sustained a subsequent hip fracture. After adjustment for age and bone mineral density, the hazard ratio for hip fracture for subjects with a proximal humeral fracture relative to those without a proximal humeral fracture was 1.83 (95% confidence interval = 1.32 to 2.53). After multivariate adjustment, this risk appeared attenuated but was still significant (hazard ratio = 1.57; 95% confidence interval = 1.12 to 2.19). The risk of a subsequent hip fracture after a proximal humeral fracture was highest within one year after the proximal humeral fracture, with a hazard ratio of 5.68 (95% confidence interval = 3.70 to 8.73). This association between humeral and hip fracture was not significant after the first year, with hazard ratios of 0.87 (95% confidence interval = 0.48 to 1.59) between one and five years after the humeral fracture and 0.58 (95% confidence interval = 0.22 to 1.56) after five years.ConclusionsIn this cohort of older white women, a proximal humeral fracture independently increased the risk of a subsequent hip fracture more than five times in the first year after the humeral fracture but was not associated with a significant increase in the hip fracture risk in subsequent years.

Project description:BackgroundHip fractures are a common and serious consequence of osteoporosis, and hip fracture patients are at high risk for recurrence. Appropriate pharmacotherapy reduces this risk and is associated with reduced mortality after hip fracture, but a care gap exists for fracture prevention in these patients. This evaluation determined rates of osteoporosis treatment and bone mineral density (BMD) testing in hip fracture patients following discharge from a rehabilitation unit.MethodsA prospective cohort study of hip fracture patients aged ? 50 on an inpatient rehabilitation unit in 2008 and 2011. Patients were seen by a nurse specialist, and encouraged to see their family physician for further assessment and treatment. Physicians were sent a letter indicating the need to follow up with their patient. Patients were contacted following discharge from hospital to determine treatment rates.ResultsOf 310 eligible hip fracture patients admitted to the rehabilitation unit in the years studied, 207 patients were reached post-discharge and provided data. Of patients who were not previously taking osteoporosis medication, 59% of patients from the 2008 cohort, and 42% of patients from the 2011 cohort had osteoporosis treatment initiated by six months following discharge. By 2 months following discharge, 46% of patients in the 2008 cohort had a new BMD performed or scheduled, while this was true for 14% of patients from the 2011 cohort. 35% of patients in 2011 had not seen their family physician by 2 months following discharge.ConclusionsRates for osteoporosis treatment and BMD testing were higher than those reported in the literature for patients not enrolled in case manager programs. BMD testing declined from 2008 to 2011. Lower treatment rates may be due to concerns regarding reports of possible association between bisphosphonate use and atypical fractures. Improving rates of patient follow-up with family physicians will be important for increasing hip fracture treatment rates after discharge.

Project description:Frailty is common in older adults with fractures. Osteoporosis medications reduce subsequent fracture, but limited data exist on medication efficacy in frail individuals. Our objective was to determine whether medications reduce the risk of subsequent fracture in frail, older adults. A retrospective cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries was conducted (2014-2016). We included adults aged ≥65 years who were hospitalized with fractures without osteoporosis treatment. Pre-fracture frailty was defined using claims-based frailty index (≥0.2 = frail). Exposure to any osteoporosis treatment (oral or intravenous bisphosphonates, denosumab, and teriparatide) was ascertained using Part B and D claims and categorized according to the cumulative duration of exposure: none, 1-90 days, and >90 days. Subsequent fractures were ascertained from Part A or B claims. Cause-specific hazard models with time-varying exposure were fit to examine the association between treatment and fracture outcomes, controlling for relevant covariates. Among 29,904 patients hospitalized with fractures, 15,345 (51.3%) were frail, and 2148 (7.2%) received osteoporosis treatment (median treatment duration 183.0 days). Patients who received treatment were younger (80.2 versus 82.2 years), female (86.5% versus 73.0%), and less frail (0.20 versus 0.22) than patients without treatment. During follow-up, 5079 (17.0%) patients experienced a subsequent fracture. Treatment with osteoporosis medications for >90 days compared with no treatment reduced the risk of fracture (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-1.00) overall. Results were similar in frail (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.65-1.12) and non-frail (HR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.61-1.04) patients but not significant. In conclusion, osteoporosis treatment >90 days was associated with similar trends in reduced risk of subsequent fracture in frail and non-frail persons. Treatment rates were very low, particularly among the frail. When weighing treatment options in frail older adults with hospitalized fractures, clinicians should be aware that drug therapy does not appear to lose its efficacy. © 2022 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Project description:This network meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of abaloparatide versus other treatment options to reduce the risk of fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The analysis indicates that abaloparatide reduces the risk of fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis versus placebo and compared with other treatment options.IntroductionThis network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the relative efficacy of abaloparatide versus other treatments to reduce the risk of fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO).MethodsPubMed®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials published before December 20, 2017, that included women with PMO who were eligible to receive interventions for primary or secondary fracture prevention. The NMA was conducted by fracture site (vertebral [VF], nonvertebral [NVF], and wrist), with the relative risk (RR) of fracture versus placebo the main clinical endpoint. The NMA used fixed-effects and random-effects approaches.ResultsA total of 4978 articles were screened, of which 22 were included in the analysis. Compared with other treatments, abaloparatide demonstrated the greatest treatment effect relative to placebo in the VF network (RR?=?0.13; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.04-0.34), the NVF network (RR?=?0.50; 95% CrI 0.28-0.85), and the wrist fracture network (RR?=?0.39; CrI 0.15-0.90). Treatment ranking showed that abaloparatide had the highest estimated probability of preventing fractures in each of the networks (79% for VF, 70% for NVF, and 53% for wrist fracture) compared with other treatments. Individual networks demonstrated a good level of agreement with direct trial evidence and direct pair-wise comparisons.ConclusionsThis NMA indicates that abaloparatide reduces the RR of VF, NVF, and wrist fracture in women with PMO with or without prior fracture versus placebo, compared with other treatment options. Limitations include that adverse events and drug costs were not considered, and that generalizability is limited to the trial populations and endpoints included in the NMA.

Project description:AimsPatients who present with fragility fractures are consistently under-evaluated and under-treated for underlying osteoporosis. This point-of-care represents a lost opportunity to prevent future fractures. This 2-arm study evaluated the success by an orthopaedic department in osteoporosis evaluation and initiating treatment.MethodsPatients over the age of 50 years with a fragility fracture of the hip were candidates for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included end-of-life care and moderate or severe dementia. Patients were prospectively randomized into 1 of 2 groups. The Letter group received a letter at the time of discharge encouraging their primary care physician to start medication for osteoporosis (Letter group). The intervention group had 4 interventions including printed information, a DEXA scan, a specific treatment recommendation, and monthly phone calls for 4 months (Intervention group). The primary outcome measure was whether the patient was on recommended treatment at 4 months from the fracture.ResultsThere were 200 patients in the study, 100 in the Letter, and 100 in the Intervention group. Sixteen patients were removed from the study since they either died (9) within 4 months of their fracture, were transferred for end-of-life care (7), and 4 dropped out. This left 180 patients for analysis. The Letter group had only 6 patients (6.2%) on recommended treatment compared with the Intervention group with 64 patients (77.1%). This was statistically significant (P < 0.0001).ConclusionOsteoporosis is a worldwide epidemic. Internationally, only about 20% of patients after a hip fracture are treated for their underlying weak bone. The most effective systems use a fracture liaison service (FLS) model. We present a 4-part intervention program that uses an FLS coordinator within the orthopaedic department. We encourage orthopaedic programs to adopt this or other models with the goal of taking the first step toward responsibility for bone health.An FLS program within an orthopaedic department can successfully initiate treatment for underlying osteoporosis.