Dataset Information

Fracture risk following high-trauma versus low-trauma fracture: a registry-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Prior high-trauma fractures identified through health services data are associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) and future fracture risk to the same extent as fractures without high-trauma. INTRODUCTION:Some have questioned the usefulness of distinguishing high-trauma fractures from low-trauma fractures. The aim of this study is to compare BMD measurements and risk of subsequent low-trauma fracture in patients with prior high- or low-trauma fractures. METHODS:Using a clinical BMD registry for the province of Manitoba, Canada, we identified women and men age 40 years or older with fracture records from linked population-based healthcare data. Age- and sex-adjusted BMD Z-scores and covariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for incident fracture were studied in relation to prior fracture status, categorized as high-trauma if associated with external injury codes and low-trauma otherwise. RESULTS:The study population consisted of 64,428 women and men with no prior fracture (mean age 63.7 years), 858 with prior high-trauma fractures (mean age 65.1 years), and 14,758 with prior low-trauma fractures (mean age 67.2 years). Mean Z-scores for those with any prior high-trauma fracture were significantly lower than in those without prior fracture (P?

SUBMITTER: Leslie WD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7115893 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fracture risk following high-trauma versus low-trauma fracture: a registry-based cohort study.

Leslie W D WD Schousboe J T JT Morin S N SN Martineau P P Lix L M LM Johansson H H McCloskey E V EV Harvey N C NC Kanis J A JA

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 20200316 6

Prior high-trauma fractures identified through health services data are associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) and future fracture risk to the same extent as fractures without high-trauma.<h4>Introduction</h4>Some have questioned the usefulness of distinguishing high-trauma fractures from low-trauma fractures. The aim of this study is to compare BMD measurements and risk of subsequent low-trauma fracture in patients with prior high- or low-trauma fractures.<h4>Methods</h4>Using a clinica ...[more]

PMID: 32173782

Similar Datasets

Project description:This registry-based study of 3068 patients with osteoporosis compared the anti-fracture effectiveness of denosumab versus bisphosphonates. Denosumab was associated with significantly greater risk reduction than alendronate or ibandronate for vertebral and any fractures. No difference in fracture risk reduction was found between zoledronate and denosumab.PurposeTo analyse the fracture risk of patients with osteoporosis receiving bisphosphonates or denosumab in a real-world setting.MethodsThis registry-based cohort study evaluated patients taking denosumab, bisphosphonates or both sequentially. Fractures were analysed using rates, rate ratios and hazard ratios (HR), including both therapies as time-varying co-variates. Fracture risk hazards were adjusted (aHR) for baseline T-Scores and trabecular bone score (TBS) and were additionally analysed with inverse probability treatment weighting.ResultsA total of 3068 patients (89% female; median age at treatment onset, 69 years [63 to 76]) received denosumab (median duration 2.8 years, [2.2 to 4.7]), bisphosphonates (3.4 years, [2.1 to 5.7]) or both sequentially. Thus, 11,078 subject-years were assessed for bisphosphonates (41% alendronate, 36% ibandronate, 23% zoledronate) and 4216 for denosumab. Moreover, 48,375 subject-years were observed before treatment onset, in addition to 2593 years of drug holidays. A total of 1481 vertebral fractures (435 under therapy), 1508 non-vertebral fractures (499 under therapy) and 202 hip fractures (67 under therapy) occurred after age 50. The risks of vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures were significantly lower under all bisphosphonates, denosumab and drug holidays than before treatment onset (all p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, baseline T-scores and TBS, denosumab was associated with lower risk than alendronate or ibandronate for vertebral fractures (aHR 0.47 (0.35 to 0.64) and 0.70 [0.53 to 0.91], p < 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively) and any fractures (aHR 0.62 [0.51 to 0.76] and 0.77 [0.64 to 0.92], p < 0.001 and p = 0.004). With propensity weighting, denosumab was associated with a lower hip fracture risk compared to alendronate (HR 0.54 [0.29 to 0.98], p = 0.044). No difference in fracture risk reduction (vertebral, non-vertebral or hip) was found between zoledronate and denosumab.ConclusionsWhen adjusting for disease severity, denosumab was associated with significantly greater risk reduction than alendronate and ibandronate for vertebral fractures. No difference in fracture risk reduction was found between zoledronate and denosumab.

Project description:BackgroundFemoral shaft fractures are common in major trauma. Early definitive fixation, within 24 hours, is feasible in most patients and is associated with improved outcomes. Nonetheless, variability might exist between trauma centers in timeliness of fixation. Such variability could impact outcomes and would therefore represent a target for quality improvement. We evaluated variability in delayed fixation (≥24 hours) between trauma centers participating in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) and measured the resultant association with important clinical outcomes at the hospital level.Methods and findingsA retrospective cohort study was performed using data derived from the ACS TQIP database. Adults with severe injury who underwent definitive fixation of a femoral shaft fracture at a level I or II trauma center participating in ACS TQIP (2012-2015) were included. Patient baseline and injury characteristics that might affect timing of fixation were considered. A hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of delayed fixation. Hospital variability in delayed fixation was measured using 2 approaches. First, the random effects output of the hierarchical model was used to identify outlier hospitals where the odds of delayed fixation were significantly higher or lower than average. Second, the median odds ratio (MOR) was calculated to quantify heterogeneity in delayed fixation between hospitals. Finally, complications (pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pneumonia, decubitus ulcer, and death) and hospital length of stay were compared across quartiles of risk-adjusted delayed fixation. We identified 17,993 patients who underwent definitive fixation at 216 trauma centers. The median injury severity score (ISS) was 13 (interquartile range [IQR] 9-22). Median time to fixation was 15 hours (IQR 7-24 hours) and delayed fixation was performed in 26% of patients. After adjusting for patient characteristics, 57 hospitals (26%) were identified as outliers, reflecting significant practice variation unexplained by patient case mix. The MOR was 1.84, reflecting heterogeneity in delayed fixation across centers. Compared to hospitals in the lowest quartile of delayed fixation, patients treated at hospitals in the highest quartile of delayed fixation suffered 2-fold higher rates of pulmonary embolism (2.6% versus 1.3%; rate ratio [RR] 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.2; P = 0.005) and required greater length of stay (7 versus 6 days; RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.1-1.19; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference with respect to mortality (1.3% versus 0.8%; RR 1.6; 95% CI 1.0-2.8; P = 0.066). The main limitations of this study include the inability to classify fractures by severity, challenges related to the heterogeneity of the study population, and the potential for residual confounding due to unmeasured factors.ConclusionsIn this large cohort study of 216 trauma centers, significant practice variability was observed in delayed fixation of femoral shaft fractures, which could not be explained by differences in patient case mix. Patients treated at centers where delayed fixation was most common were at significantly greater risk of pulmonary embolism and required longer hospital stay. Trauma centers should strive to minimize delays in fixation, and quality improvement initiatives should emphasize this recommendation in best practice guidelines.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Studies aimed at improving the provision of evidence-based care (EBC) for the management of acute whiplash injuries have been largely successful. However, whether EBC is broadly provided and whether delivery of EBC varies based on risk of non-recovery, is uncertain. Receiving EBC should improve recovery, though this relationship has yet to be established. Further, mitigating the effect of EBC is the relationship with the practitioner, a phenomenon poorly understood in WAD. This study aimed to determine the proportion of individuals with whiplash, at differing baseline risk levels, receiving EBC. This study also aimed to determine whether receiving EBC and the therapeutic relationship were associated with recovery at 3?months post injury. METHODS:Participants with acute whiplash were recruited from public hospital emergency departments, private physiotherapy practices, and State Insurance Regulatory Authority (SIRA) databases. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline (demographics, risk of non-recovery) and 3-months (treatment received, risk identification, therapeutic relationship) post injury. Primary health care providers (HCPs) treating these participants also completed questionnaires at 3-months. Recovery was defined as neck disability index ?4/50 and global perceived effect of ?4/5. RESULTS:Two-hundred and twenty-eight people with acute whiplash, and 53 primary care practitioners were recruited. The majority of the cohort reported receiving EBC, with correct application of the Canadian C-spine rule (74%), and provision of active treatments (e.g. 89% receiving advice) high. Non-recommended (passive) treatments were also received by a large proportion of the cohort (e.g. 50% receiving massage). The therapeutic relationship was associated with higher odds of recovery, which was potentially clinically significant (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.62). EBC was not significantly associated with recovery. CONCLUSIONS:Guideline-based knowledge and practice has largely been retained from previous implementation strategies. However, recommendations for routine risk identification and tailored management, and reduction in the provision of passive treatment have not. The therapeutic relationship was identified as one of several important predictors of recovery, suggesting that clinicians must develop rapport and understanding with their patients to improve the likelihood of recovery.

Project description:Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) occurring during the course of osteoporosis treatment usually lead to discontinuation of anti-resorptive (AR) drugs. However, the risk of fracture after an AFF is unknown. We conducted a follow-up study of patients with AFF matched 1:3 for age and gender with patients with a peripheral major osteoporotic fracture (pMOF), in the setting of a fracture liaison service, to investigate the incidence of subsequent low-trauma fractures. Fifty-five patients with AFF (95% women, age [mean ± standard deviation] 75 ± 10 years, 89% exposed to AR drugs), followed for 6.2 ± 3.7 years, were compared to 165 matched controls with a pMOF (hip 85%) followed for 4.3 ± 2.6 years. During the follow-up, 38% of patients in the AFF group and 16% in the pMOF group received AR therapies. Continuation of AR drugs after an AFF was associated with contralateral AFF in 27% of subjects. The risks of new low-trauma, major osteoporotic and imminent (within 2 years) fractures, were similar between the two groups: incidence rate ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of subsequent fracture following AFF relative to pMOF, 1.30 (95% CI, 0.82-2.04), 1.28 (95% CI, 0.74-2.15), and 1.11 (95% CI, 0.54-2.15), respectively. Moreover, the risk of sustaining multiple fractures per participant was significantly increased among patients with AFF compared to pMOF (hazard ratio 1.48 [95% CI, 1.00-2.19]; p = 0.049). When taking mortality into account, the risk of subsequent fractures tended to be higher in the AFF group (sub-hazard ratio 1.42 [95% CI, 0.95-2.12]). In conclusion, patients who sustained an AFF are at high risk of subsequent fragility fractures, at least equal or even greater to the risk observed after a pMOF. However, continuation of AR drugs increases the risk of contralateral AFF. Therefore, optimal modalities for secondary fracture prevention after AFF require further evaluation. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Project description:We identified large between-ethnicity calibration differences in the Canadian FRAX® tool which substantially overestimated the major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) risk in Asian women and Black women, and overestimated hip fracture risk in Asian women.PurposeFRAX® is calibrated using population-specific fracture and mortality data. The need for FRAX to accommodate ethnic diversity within a country is uncertain. We addressed this question using the population-based Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Program registry and self-reported ethnicity.MethodsThe study population was women aged 40 years or older with baseline FRAX assessments (Canadian and other ethnic calculators), fracture outcomes, and self-reported ethnicity (White N = 68,907 [referent], Asian N = 1910, Black N = 356). Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for time to MOF and hip fracture were estimated. We examined candidate variables from DXA that might contribute to ethnic differences including skeletal size, hip axis length (HAL), trabecular bone score (TBS), and estimated body composition.ResultsAdjusted for baseline risk using the Canadian FRAX tool with BMD, Asian women compared with White women were at much lower risk for MOF (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.59) and hip fracture (0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.34). Black women were also at lower MOF risk (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.32-1.00); there were no hip fractures. The US ethnic-specific FRAX calculators accounted for most of the between-ethnicity differences in MOF risk (86% for Asian, 92% for Black) but only partially accounted for lower hip fracture risk in Asian women (40%). The candidate variables explained only a minority of the effect of ethnicity. Gradient of risk in analyses was similar (p-interactions ethnicity*FRAX non-significant).ConclusionsWe identified significant ethnic differences in performance of the Canadian FRAX tool with fracture probability overestimated among Asian and Black women. The US ethnic calculators helped to address this discrepancy for MOF risk assessment, but not for hip fracture risk among Asian women.

Dataset Information

Fracture risk following high-trauma versus low-trauma fracture: a registry-based cohort study.

Publications

Fracture risk following high-trauma versus low-trauma fracture: a registry-based cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets