Literature DB >> 20393076

[Management of osteoporosis in short-term geriatric units].

Nathalie Champoux1, Martine Lafleur, Benoît Bertrand, Suzanne Gilbert, Judith Latour, Marie Jeanne Kergoat.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify the recommendations in Canadian and American clinical practice guidelines for the management of osteoporosis that are applicable to vulnerable, older patients in short-term geriatric units (STGU).
DESIGN: Modified Delphi approach according to the RAND/UCLA method.
SETTING: A panel of experts from various regions of Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: The panel consisted of 6 physicians, 5 pharmacists, and 3 nutritionists recognized by their peers for their expertise in STGU.
METHODS: Eleven recommendations from the North American guidelines were submitted to a panel of experts who were asked to identify those most appropriate for the management of osteoporosis in STGU. Each expert's level of agreement with the recommendations and the experts' general level of agreement were used to determine the relevance of the recommendations.
FINDINGS: The experts reached a consensus on each of the 11 recommendations. Seven recommendations were deemed appropriate for the management of osteoporosis in vulnerable, older patients in STGU. Bone mineral density measurement as a parameter for follow-up was the only recommendation deemed inappropriate in this context. The experts remained uncertain about 3 recommendations: systematic screening for osteoporosis by bone mineral density measurement; systematic screening or evaluation of the risk factors for fractures; and pharmacologic prevention in vulnerable, older patients with an increased risk of fracture.
CONCLUSION: Some of the recommendations issued in the North American recommendations appear to be less appropriate for managing osteoporosis in vulnerable, older patients in STGU. The recommendations retained in this study could be used to standardize interventions for these patients and to determine the extent to which current practice follows the recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20393076      PMCID: PMC2860841     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  14 in total

1.  It's all in a name. When is a 'Delphi study' not a Delphi study?

Authors:  J Crisp; D Pelletier; C Duffield; S Nagy; A Adams
Journal:  Aust J Adv Nurs       Date:  1999 Mar-May       Impact factor: 0.647

Review 2.  Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique.

Authors:  F Hasson; S Keeney; H McKenna
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.187

Review 3.  How expert are the experts? An exploration of the concept of 'expert' within Delphi panel techniques.

Authors:  John Baker; Karina Lovell; Neil Harris
Journal:  Nurse Res       Date:  2006

Review 4.  Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development.

Authors:  M K Murphy; N A Black; D L Lamping; C M McKee; C F Sanderson; J Askham; T Marteau
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 4.014

5.  Physician ratings of appropriate indications for six medical and surgical procedures.

Authors:  R E Park; A Fink; R H Brook; M R Chassin; K L Kahn; N J Merrick; J Kosecoff; D H Solomon
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Appropriateness in health care delivery: definitions, measurement and policy implications.

Authors:  J N Lavis; G M Anderson
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1996-02-01       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Selecting target conditions for quality of care improvement in vulnerable older adults.

Authors:  E M Sloss; D H Solomon; P G Shekelle; R T Young; D Saliba; C H MacLean; L Z Rubenstein; J F Schnelle; C J Kamberg; N S Wenger
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.562

Review 8.  2002 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada.

Authors:  Jacques P Brown; Robert G Josse
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-11-12       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Quality of care is associated with survival in vulnerable older patients.

Authors:  Takahiro Higashi; Paul G Shekelle; John L Adams; Caren J Kamberg; Carol P Roth; David H Solomon; David B Reuben; Lillian Chiang; Catherine H MacLean; John T Chang; Roy T Young; Debra M Saliba; Neil S Wenger
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-08-16       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Risk-adjusted mortality rates of elderly veterans with hip fractures.

Authors:  Elizabeth Bass; Dustin D French; Douglas D Bradham; Laurence Z Rubenstein
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2007-04-08       Impact factor: 3.797

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.