I Kuo1, C Ong, L Simmons, D Bliuc, J Eisman, J Center. 1. Bone and Mineral Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia. ivankuo@optushome.com.au
Abstract
UNLABELLED: In this study, we offered osteoporosis investigation and treatment directly to patients at out-patient fracture clinics shortly after they sustained minimal trauma fractures. We achieved long-term compliance to the recommended investigation and treatment in 80% of patients. This approach is much more successful than previous interventions. INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis remains under-treated in minimal-trauma fracture subjects. The aim of this study was to determine if direct intervention at orthopaedic fracture clinics would improve post-fracture management in these subjects. METHODS: From March 2004 to March 2006, 155 consecutive minimal-trauma fracture subjects (mean age 64.0 +/- 17.6) attending fracture clinics at St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, had a specific medical assessment, following which they were recommended BMD and laboratory testing. Treatment recommendations were given after review of investigations with further follow-up at a median of 8.6 months following therapy. Comparison of outcomes was made with a similar group of patients given written information 2 years prior. RESULTS: At baseline, 47% of patients had prior fractures, but only 26% had had BMD screening. Twenty-one percent were on anti-resorptive therapy, and 15% were on calcium/vitamin D. Following intervention, 83% had a BMD and of these, 68% had a T-score < -1.0. Of treatment naïve patients, 44% were recommended anti-resorptive therapy and 56% were recommended calcium/vitamin D. Compliance was 80% for anti-resorptive and 76% for calcium/vitamin D. Female gender and lower BMD were predictors of compliance. CONCLUSION: Compared with information-based intervention, direct intervention improved management two to fivefold, maintaining long-term treatment in 90% of osteoporotic and 73% of osteopenic subjects requiring therapy.
UNLABELLED: In this study, we offered osteoporosis investigation and treatment directly to patients at out-patientfracture clinics shortly after they sustained minimal trauma fractures. We achieved long-term compliance to the recommended investigation and treatment in 80% of patients. This approach is much more successful than previous interventions. INTRODUCTION:Osteoporosis remains under-treated in minimal-trauma fracture subjects. The aim of this study was to determine if direct intervention at orthopaedic fracture clinics would improve post-fracture management in these subjects. METHODS: From March 2004 to March 2006, 155 consecutive minimal-trauma fracture subjects (mean age 64.0 +/- 17.6) attending fracture clinics at St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, had a specific medical assessment, following which they were recommended BMD and laboratory testing. Treatment recommendations were given after review of investigations with further follow-up at a median of 8.6 months following therapy. Comparison of outcomes was made with a similar group of patients given written information 2 years prior. RESULTS: At baseline, 47% of patients had prior fractures, but only 26% had had BMD screening. Twenty-one percent were on anti-resorptive therapy, and 15% were on calcium/vitamin D. Following intervention, 83% had a BMD and of these, 68% had a T-score < -1.0. Of treatment naïve patients, 44% were recommended anti-resorptive therapy and 56% were recommended calcium/vitamin D. Compliance was 80% for anti-resorptive and 76% for calcium/vitamin D. Female gender and lower BMD were predictors of compliance. CONCLUSION: Compared with information-based intervention, direct intervention improved management two to fivefold, maintaining long-term treatment in 90% of osteoporotic and 73% of osteopenic subjects requiring therapy.
Authors: Susan K Brenneman; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Shiva Sajjan; Leona E Markson; Ethel S Siris Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Mary L Bouxsein; John Kaufman; Laura Tosi; Steven Cummings; Joseph Lane; Olof Johnell Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: Anna M Sawka; Alexandra Papaioannou; Jonathan D Adachi; Amiram Gafni; David A Hanley; Lehana Thabane Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2005-07-11 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Adrianne Feldstein; Patricia J Elmer; David H Smith; Michael Herson; Eric Orwoll; Chuhe Chen; Mikel Aickin; Martha C Swain Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: K Ganda; M Puech; J S Chen; R Speerin; J Bleasel; J R Center; J A Eisman; L March; M J Seibel Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: D Marsh; K Akesson; D E Beaton; E R Bogoch; S Boonen; M-L Brandi; A R McLellan; P J Mitchell; J E M Sale; D A Wahl Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: P R Ebeling; D-C Chan; T C Lau; J K Lee; T Songpatanasilp; S H Wong; F L Hew; R Sethi; M Williams Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.507