Project description:Orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) may provide benefits for geriatric fragility fracture patients in terms of more frequent osteoporosis treatment and fewer re-fractures. Yet, we did not find higher costs in OGCM hospitals for re-fractures or antiosteoporotic medication for most fracture sites within 12 months, although antiosteoporotic medication was more often prescribed.PurposeEvidence suggests benefits of orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) for hip fracture patients. Yet, evidence for other fractures is rare. The aim of our study was to conduct an evaluation of economic and health outcomes after the German OGCM for geriatric fragility fracture patients.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was based on German health and long-term care insurance data. Individuals were 80 years and older, sustained a fragility fracture in 2014-2018, and were treated in hospitals certified for OGCM (ATZ group), providing OGCM without certification (OGCM group) or usual care (control group). Healthcare costs from payer perspective, prescribed medications, and re-fractures were investigated within 6 and 12 months. We used weighted gamma and two-part models and applied entropy balancing to account for the lack of randomization. All analyses were stratified per fracture site.ResultsWe observed 206,273 patients within 12-month follow-up, of whom 14,100 were treated in ATZ, 133,353 in OGCM, and 58,820 in other hospitals. Total average inpatient costs per patient were significantly higher in the OGCM and particularly ATZ group for all fracture sites, compared to control group. We did not find significant differences in costs for re-fractures or antiosteoporotic medication for most fracture sites, although antiosteoporotic medication was significantly more often observed in the OGCM and particularly ATZ group for hip, pelvic, and humerus fractures.ConclusionThe observed healthcare costs were higher in ATZ and OGCM hospitals within 12 months. Antiosteoporotic medication was prescribed more often in both groups for most fracture sites, although the corresponding medication costs did not increase.

Project description:BackgroundFragility fractures are a major health concern for older adults and can result in disability, admission to hospital and long-term care, and reduced quality of life. This Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on screening to prevent fragility fractures in community-dwelling individuals aged 40 years and older who are not currently on preventive pharmacotherapy.MethodsWe commissioned systematic reviews on benefits and harms of screening, predictive accuracy of risk assessment tools, patient acceptability and benefits of treatment. We analyzed treatment harms via a rapid overview of reviews. We further examined patient values and preferences via focus groups and engaged stakeholders at key points throughout the project. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome and strength of recommendations, and adhered to Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE), Guidelines International Network and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP-2) reporting guidance.RecommendationsWe recommend "risk assessment-first" screening for prevention of fragility fractures in females aged 65 years and older, with initial application of the Canadian clinical Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) without bone mineral density (BMD). The FRAX result should be used to facilitate shared decision-making about the possible benefits and harms of preventive pharmacotherapy. After this discussion, if preventive pharmacotherapy is being considered, clinicians should request BMD measurement using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the femoral neck, and re-estimate fracture risk by adding the BMD T-score into FRAX (conditional recommendation, low-certainty evidence). We recommend against screening females aged 40-64 years and males aged 40 years and older (strong recommendation, very low-certainty evidence). These recommendations apply to community-dwelling individuals who are not currently on pharmacotherapy to prevent fragility fractures.InterpretationRisk assessment-first screening for females aged 65 years and older facilitates shared decision-making and allows patients to consider preventive pharmacotherapy within their individual risk context (before BMD). Recommendations against screening males and younger females emphasize the importance of good clinical practice, where clinicians are alert to changes in health that may indicate the patient has experienced or is at higher risk of fragility fracture.

Project description:PurposeTo inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care by systematically reviewing direct evidence on the effectiveness and acceptability of screening adults 40 years and older in primary care to reduce fragility fractures and related mortality and morbidity, and indirect evidence on the accuracy of fracture risk prediction tools. Evidence on the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment will be reviewed, if needed to meaningfully influence the Task Force's decision-making.MethodsA modified update of an existing systematic review will evaluate screening effectiveness, the accuracy of screening tools, and treatment benefits. For treatment harms, we will integrate studies from existing systematic reviews. A de novo review on acceptability will be conducted. Peer-reviewed searches (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO [acceptability only]), grey literature, and hand searches of reviews and included studies will update the literature. Based on pre-specified criteria, we will screen studies for inclusion following a liberal-accelerated approach. Final inclusion will be based on consensus. Data extraction for study results will be performed independently by two reviewers while other data will be verified by a second reviewer; there may be some reliance on extracted data from the existing reviews. The risk of bias assessments reported in the existing reviews will be verified and for new studies will be performed independently. When appropriate, results will be pooled using either pairwise random effects meta-analysis (screening and treatment) or restricted maximum likelihood estimation with Hartun-Knapp-Sidnick-Jonkman correction (risk prediction model calibration). Subgroups of interest to explain heterogeneity are age, sex, and menopausal status. Two independent reviewers will rate the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, with consensus reached for each outcome rated as critical or important by the Task Force.DiscussionSince the publication of other guidance in Canada, new trials have been published that are likely to improve understanding of screening in primary care settings to prevent fragility fractures. A systematic review is required to inform updated recommendations that align with the current evidence base.

Project description:In many countries, osteoporosis is predominantly managed by primary care physicians; however, management after a fragility fracture has not been widely investigated. We describe osteoporosis care gaps in a real-world patient cohort. Our findings help inform initiatives to identify and overcome obstacles to effective management of patients after fragility fracture.PurposeA fragility fracture is a major risk factor for subsequent fracture in adults aged ≥ 50 years. This retrospective observational study aimed to characterize post-fracture management in Canadian primary care.MethodsA total of 778 patients with an index fragility fracture (low-trauma, excluding small bones) occurring between 2014 and 2016 were identified from medical records at 76 primary care centers in Canada, with follow-up until January 2018.ResultsOf 778 patients (80.5% female, median age [IQR] 73 [64-80]), 215 were on osteoporosis treatment and 269 had osteoporosis diagnosis recorded prior to their index fracture. The median follow-up was 363 (IQR 91-808) days. Of patients not on osteoporosis treatment at their index fracture, 60.2% (n = 339/563) remained untreated after their index fracture and 62.2% (n = 23/37) continued untreated after their subsequent fracture. After their index fracture, fracture risk assessment (FRAX or CAROC) was not performed in 83.2% (n = 647/778) of patients, and 59.9% (n = 466/778) of patients did not receive bone mineral density testing. Of patients without osteoporosis diagnosis recorded prior to their index date, 61.3% (n = 300/489) remained undiagnosed after their index fracture. At least one subsequent fracture occurred in 11.5% (n = 86/778) of patients.ConclusionIn the primary care setting, fragility fracture infrequently resulted in osteoporosis treatment or fracture risk assessment, even after multiple fragility fractures. These results suggest a fragility fracture is not recognized as a major risk factor for subsequent fracture and its occurrence does not prompt primary care physicians to intervene. These data urge initiatives to identify and overcome obstacles to primary care physicians' effective management of patients after fragility fractures.

Project description:This study used primary care data to estimate the incidence of recorded diagnosis of osteoporosis, osteopenia, and fragility fracture in the UK during 2000-2018 accounting for age, sex, calendar year and social deprivation. More than 3 million people aged 50-99 years were included. We found that men living in the most deprived areas had a 45% higher risk of being diagnosed with osteoporosis and 50% higher risk of fragility fracture compared to men living in the least deprived areas.Purposea) To estimate the incidence trends of a recorded diagnosis of osteoporosis, osteopenia, and fragility fracture in the UK over time; b) to describe differences according to age, sex, and social deprivation.MethodsThis is a longitudinal population-based cohort study using routinely collected primary care data obtained via IQVIA Medical Research Database (IMRD). All patients aged 50-99 years registered with a practice participating in THIN (The Health Improvement Network) between 2000-2018 were included. The first recorded diagnosis of osteoporosis, osteopenia, or fragility fracture was used to estimate incidence rates (IR) per 10,000 person-years at risk. Poisson regression was used to provide Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) adjusted by age, sex, social deprivation, calendar year, and practice effect.ResultsThe year-specific adjusted IRR of recorded osteoporosis was highest in 2009 in women [IRR 1.44(95%CI 1.38-1.50)], whereas in men it was highest in 2013-2014 [IRR 1.94(95%CI 1.72-2.18)] compared to 2000. The year-specific adjusted IRR of fragility fracture was highest in 2012 in women [IRR 1.77(95%CI 1.69-1.85)], whereas in men it was highest in 2013 [IRR 1.64(95%CI 1.51-1.78)] compared to 2000. Men in the most deprived areas had a higher risk of being diagnosed with osteoporosis [IRR 1.45(95%CI 1.38-1.53)], osteopenia [IRR 1.17(95%CI 1.09-1.26)], and fragility fracture [IRR 1.50(95%CI 1.44-1.56)] compared to those living in the least deprived areas, but smaller differences were seen in women.ConclusionUse of fracture risk assessment tools may enhance the detection of osteoporosis cases in primary care. Further research is needed on the effect of social deprivation on diagnosis of osteoporosis and fractures.

Project description:This report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five countries of the European Union plus Sweden (EU6). In 2017, new fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated at 2.7 million with an associated annual cost of €37.5 billion and a loss of 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years.IntroductionOsteoporosis is characterized by reduced bone mass and strength, which increases the risk of fragility fractures, which in turn, represent the main consequence of the disease. This report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five EU countries and Sweden (designated the EU6).MethodsA series of metrics describing the burden and management of fragility fractures were defined by a scientific steering committee. A working group performed the data collection and analysis. Data were collected from current literature, available retrospective data and public sources. Different methods were applied (e.g. standard statistics and health economic modelling), where appropriate, to perform the analysis for each metric.ResultsTotal fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated to increase from 2.7 million in 2017 to 3.3 million in 2030; a 23% increase. The resulting annual fracture-related costs (€37.5 billion in 2017) are expected to increase by 27%. An estimated 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were lost in 2017 due to fragility fractures. The current disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1000 individuals age 50 years or more were estimated at 21 years, which is higher than the estimates for stroke or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The treatment gap (percentage of eligible individuals not receiving treatment with osteoporosis drugs) in the EU6 is estimated to be 73% for women and 63% for men; an increase of 17% since 2010. If all patients who fracture in the EU6 were enrolled into fracture liaison services, at least 19,000 fractures every year might be avoided.ConclusionsFracture-related burden is expected to increase over the coming decades. Given the substantial treatment gap and proven cost-effectiveness of fracture prevention schemes such as fracture liaison services, urgent action is needed to ensure that all individuals at high risk of fragility fracture are appropriately assessed and treated.

Dataset Information

Prevalence and treatment of fragility fractures in Spanish primary care: PREFRAOS study

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets