Rollin M Wright1. 1. Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. wrightr@dom.pitt.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Epidemiologic studies demonstrated that 70% to 85% of nursing home residents have osteoporosis. Few studies report comprehensive information about treatment of osteoporosis in nursing facilities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of osteoporosis treatment and identify resident characteristics associated with the use of antiresorptive medications or supplements indicated to treat osteoporosis in nursing homes. METHODS: The study design was cross-sectional. The Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Drug Use via Epidemiology database provided the data. From this database, 186,221 residents were identified as newly admitted to nursing facilities in Kansas, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, and South Dakota between 1998 and 2000. The outcome measure was the use of antiresorptive medications (alendronate, risedronate, calcitonin, estrogen, raloxifene) or supplements (calcium with vitamin D) indicated for treatment of osteoporosis. The independent variables included demographic, health status, and fracture risk factors. RESULTS: Of the overall sample, 9.1% received antiresorptive medications and/or supplements indicated for osteoporosis treatment. The most commonly used treatment was the combination of calcium and vitamin D (5.0%). Calcitonin (2.5%) use exceeded that of any other antiresorptive. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that a diagnosis of osteoporosis and female gender were strongly associated with being more likely to receive an osteoporosis treatment (OR 6.34 with 95% CI 6.11-6.64 and OR 2.67 with 95% CI 2.53-2.83 respectively). The number of medications residents received was also strongly associated with receiving osteoporosis treatment. Being black and having 4 or more active diagnoses were strongly associated with lower odds of receiving treatment (OR 0.63 with 95% CI 0.57-0.68 and OR 0.71 with 95% CI 0.68-0.74 for 4 to 6 diagnoses). DISCUSSION: Newly admitted nursing facility residents infrequently received an indicated osteoporosis treatment, including calcium with vitamin D, despite the expected high prevalence of osteoporosis in this setting. Few demographic, health status, and fracture risk factors were strongly associated with receiving indicated treatment.
INTRODUCTION: Epidemiologic studies demonstrated that 70% to 85% of nursing home residents have osteoporosis. Few studies report comprehensive information about treatment of osteoporosis in nursing facilities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of osteoporosis treatment and identify resident characteristics associated with the use of antiresorptive medications or supplements indicated to treat osteoporosis in nursing homes. METHODS: The study design was cross-sectional. The Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Drug Use via Epidemiology database provided the data. From this database, 186,221 residents were identified as newly admitted to nursing facilities in Kansas, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, and South Dakota between 1998 and 2000. The outcome measure was the use of antiresorptive medications (alendronate, risedronate, calcitonin, estrogen, raloxifene) or supplements (calcium with vitamin D) indicated for treatment of osteoporosis. The independent variables included demographic, health status, and fracture risk factors. RESULTS: Of the overall sample, 9.1% received antiresorptive medications and/or supplements indicated for osteoporosis treatment. The most commonly used treatment was the combination of calcium and vitamin D (5.0%). Calcitonin (2.5%) use exceeded that of any other antiresorptive. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that a diagnosis of osteoporosis and female gender were strongly associated with being more likely to receive an osteoporosis treatment (OR 6.34 with 95% CI 6.11-6.64 and OR 2.67 with 95% CI 2.53-2.83 respectively). The number of medications residents received was also strongly associated with receiving osteoporosis treatment. Being black and having 4 or more active diagnoses were strongly associated with lower odds of receiving treatment (OR 0.63 with 95% CI 0.57-0.68 and OR 0.71 with 95% CI 0.68-0.74 for 4 to 6 diagnoses). DISCUSSION: Newly admitted nursing facility residents infrequently received an indicated osteoporosis treatment, including calcium with vitamin D, despite the expected high prevalence of osteoporosis in this setting. Few demographic, health status, and fracture risk factors were strongly associated with receiving indicated treatment.
Authors: V Mor; K Branco; J Fleishman; C Hawes; C Phillips; J Morris; B Fries Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: S L Hartmaier; P D Sloane; H A Guess; G G Koch; C M Mitchell; C D Phillips Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: U A Liberman; S R Weiss; J Bröll; H W Minne; H Quan; N H Bell; J Rodriguez-Portales; R W Downs; J Dequeker; M Favus Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-11-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan L Greenspan; Subashan Perera; David Nace; Kimberly S Zukowski; Mary A Ferchak; Carroll J Lee; Smita Nayak; Neil M Resnick Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Y Rolland; G Abellan van Kan; S Hermabessiere; S Gerard; S Guyonnet Gillette; B Vellas Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Y Rolland; P de Souto Barreto; G Abellan Van Kan; C Annweiler; O Beauchet; H Bischoff-Ferrari; G Berrut; H Blain; M Bonnefoy; M Cesari; G Duque; M Ferry; O Guerin; O Hanon; B Lesourd; J Morley; A Raynaud-Simon; G Ruault; J-C Souberbielle; B Vellas Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Amy H Warriner; Ryan C Outman; Kenneth G Saag; Sarah D Berry; Cathleen Colón-Emeric; Kellie L Flood; Kenneth W Lyles; S Bobo Tanner; Nelson B Watts; Jeffrey R Curtis Journal: South Med J Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 0.954
Authors: Gustavo Duque; Stephen R Lord; Jenson Mak; Kirtan Ganda; Jacqueline J T Close; Peter Ebeling; Alexandra Papaioannou; Charles A Inderjeeth Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2016-06-24 Impact factor: 4.669