UNLABELLED: Treatment rates of osteoporosis after fracture are very low. Women who suffer a fragility fracture have a greater chance of receiving anti-fracture treatment if they had low bone mineral density (BMD), a fracture at the hip, femur or pelvis, administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements and/or an age > or =60 years. INTRODUCTION: This investigation identifies the predictors of osteoporosis treatment 6 to 8 months following fragility fracture in women >50 years of age. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, women were recruited 0 to 16 weeks following fracture and classified as having experienced fragility or traumatic fractures (phase 1). Six to 8 months following fracture, women completed a questionnaire on demographic features, clinical characteristics and risk factors for osteoporosis (phase 2). Osteoporosis treatment was defined as initiating anti-fracture therapy (bisphosphonate, raloxifene, nasal calcitonin and teriparatide) after fracture in those previously untreated. RESULTS: Of the 1,273 women completing phase 1, 1,001 (79%) sustained a fragility fracture, and of these women, 738 were untreated for osteoporosis at phase 1 and completed the phase 2 questionnaire. Significant predictors of treatment included BMD result, fracture site, administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements at the time of fracture and age > or =60 years. All other risk factors for osteoporosis, such as fracture history after the age of 40 years, family history of osteoporosis and comorbidities did not significantly influence the treatment rate. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians largely based their decision to treat on BMD results and not on the clinical event-fragility fracture.
UNLABELLED: Treatment rates of osteoporosis after fracture are very low. Women who suffer a fragility fracture have a greater chance of receiving anti-fracture treatment if they had low bone mineral density (BMD), a fracture at the hip, femur or pelvis, administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements and/or an age > or =60 years. INTRODUCTION: This investigation identifies the predictors of osteoporosis treatment 6 to 8 months following fragility fracture in women >50 years of age. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, women were recruited 0 to 16 weeks following fracture and classified as having experienced fragility or traumatic fractures (phase 1). Six to 8 months following fracture, women completed a questionnaire on demographic features, clinical characteristics and risk factors for osteoporosis (phase 2). Osteoporosis treatment was defined as initiating anti-fracture therapy (bisphosphonate, raloxifene, nasal calcitonin and teriparatide) after fracture in those previously untreated. RESULTS: Of the 1,273 women completing phase 1, 1,001 (79%) sustained a fragility fracture, and of these women, 738 were untreated for osteoporosis at phase 1 and completed the phase 2 questionnaire. Significant predictors of treatment included BMD result, fracture site, administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements at the time of fracture and age > or =60 years. All other risk factors for osteoporosis, such as fracture history after the age of 40 years, family history of osteoporosis and comorbidities did not significantly influence the treatment rate. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians largely based their decision to treat on BMD results and not on the clinical event-fragility fracture.
Authors: C H Chesnut; S Silverman; K Andriano; H Genant; A Gimona; S Harris; D Kiel; M LeBoff; M Maricic; P Miller; C Moniz; M Peacock; P Richardson; N Watts; D Baylink Journal: Am J Med Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: C De Laet; J A Kanis; A Odén; H Johanson; O Johnell; P Delmas; J A Eisman; H Kroger; S Fujiwara; P Garnero; E V McCloskey; D Mellstrom; L J Melton; P J Meunier; H A P Pols; J Reeve; A Silman; A Tenenhouse Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2005-06-01 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: S T Harris; N B Watts; H K Genant; C D McKeever; T Hangartner; M Keller; C H Chesnut; J Brown; E F Eriksen; M S Hoseyni; D W Axelrod; P D Miller Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-10-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: B Ettinger; D M Black; B H Mitlak; R K Knickerbocker; T Nickelsen; H K Genant; C Christiansen; P D Delmas; J R Zanchetta; J Stakkestad; C C Glüer; K Krueger; F J Cohen; S Eckert; K E Ensrud; L V Avioli; P Lips; S R Cummings Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-08-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: O Johnell; J A Kanis; A Odén; I Sernbo; I Redlund-Johnell; C Petterson; C De Laet; B Jönsson Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-10-30 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Aasis Unnanuntana; Quang V Ton; John P Kleimeyer; Joseph T Nguyen; Joseph M Lane Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2011-08-24 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: O Wang; Y Hu; S Gong; Q Xue; Z Deng; L Wang; H Liu; H Tang; X Guo; J Chen; X Jia; Y Xu; L Lan; C Lei; H Dong; G Yuan; Q Fu; Y Wei; W Xia; L Xu Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: C Klop; D Gibson-Smith; P J M Elders; P M J Welsing; H G M Leufkens; N C Harvey; J W J Bijlsma; T-P van Staa; F de Vries Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Pamela Guggina; Julie Flahive; Frederick H Hooven; Nelson B Watts; Ethel S Siris; Stuart Silverman; Christian Roux; Johannes Pfeilschifter; Susan L Greenspan; Adolfo Díez-Pérez; Cyrus Cooper; Juliet E Compston; Roland Chapurlat; Steven Boonen; Jonathan D Adachi; Frederick A Anderson; Stephen Gehlbach Journal: Bone Date: 2012-09-03 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Stephen Gehlbach; Frederick H Hooven; Allison Wyman; Adolfo Diez-Perez; Jonathan D Adachi; Xuemei Luo; Andrew G Bushmakin; Frederick A Anderson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 3.240