OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of untreated women who reported receiving treatment after incident fracture and to identify factors that predict treatment across an international spectrum of individuals. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. Self-administered questionnaires were mailed at baseline and 1 year. SETTING: Multinational cohort of noninstitutionalized women recruited from 723 primary physician practices in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty thousand three hundred ninety-three postmenopausal women aged 55 and older were recruited with a 2:1 oversampling of women aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Data collected included participant demographics, medical history, fracture occurrence, medications, and risk factors for fracture. Anti-osteoporosis medications (AOMs) included estrogen, selective estrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, parathyroid hormone, and strontium. RESULTS: After the first year of follow-up, 1,075 women reported an incident fracture. Of these, 17% had started AOM, including 15% of those with a single fracture and 35% with multiple fractures. Predictors of treatment included baseline calcium use (P = .01), baseline diagnosis of osteoporosis (P < .001), and fracture type (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, women taking calcium supplements at baseline (odds ratio (OR) = 1.67) and with a baseline diagnosis of osteoporosis (OR = 2.55) were more likely to be taking AOM. Hip fracture (OR = 2.61), spine fracture (OR = 6.61), and multiple fractures (OR = 3.79) were associated with AOM treatment. Age, global region, and use of high-risk medications were not associated with treatment. CONCLUSION: More than 80% of older women with new fractures were not treated, despite the availability of AOM. Important factors associated with treatment in this international cohort included diagnosis of osteoporosis before the incident fracture, spine fracture, and to a lesser degree, hip fracture.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of untreated women who reported receiving treatment after incident fracture and to identify factors that predict treatment across an international spectrum of individuals. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. Self-administered questionnaires were mailed at baseline and 1 year. SETTING: Multinational cohort of noninstitutionalized women recruited from 723 primary physician practices in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty thousand three hundred ninety-three postmenopausal women aged 55 and older were recruited with a 2:1 oversampling of women aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Data collected included participant demographics, medical history, fracture occurrence, medications, and risk factors for fracture. Anti-osteoporosis medications (AOMs) included estrogen, selective estrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, parathyroid hormone, and strontium. RESULTS: After the first year of follow-up, 1,075 women reported an incident fracture. Of these, 17% had started AOM, including 15% of those with a single fracture and 35% with multiple fractures. Predictors of treatment included baseline calcium use (P = .01), baseline diagnosis of osteoporosis (P < .001), and fracture type (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, women taking calcium supplements at baseline (odds ratio (OR) = 1.67) and with a baseline diagnosis of osteoporosis (OR = 2.55) were more likely to be taking AOM. Hip fracture (OR = 2.61), spine fracture (OR = 6.61), and multiple fractures (OR = 3.79) were associated with AOM treatment. Age, global region, and use of high-risk medications were not associated with treatment. CONCLUSION: More than 80% of older women with new fractures were not treated, despite the availability of AOM. Important factors associated with treatment in this international cohort included diagnosis of osteoporosis before the incident fracture, spine fracture, and to a lesser degree, hip fracture.
Authors: M C Nevitt; S R Cummings; W S Browner; D G Seeley; J A Cauley; T M Vogt; D M Black Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1992-03-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: K Shawn Davison; David L Kendler; Patrick Ammann; Douglas C Bauer; David W Dempster; Larry Dian; David A Hanley; Steven T Harris; Michael R McClung; Wojciech P Olszynski; Chui K Yuen Journal: Am J Med Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: A A Ismail; T W O'Neill; W Cockerill; J D Finn; J B Cannata; K Hoszowski; O Johnell; C Matthis; H Raspe; A Raspe; J Reeve; A J Silman Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2000 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Susan E Andrade; Sumit R Majumdar; K Arnold Chan; Diana S M Buist; Alan S Go; Michael Goodman; David H Smith; Richard Platt; Jerry H Gurwitz Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2003-09-22
Authors: Mary Anderson Wallace; Andrew Hammes; Micol S Rothman; Anastasiya A Trizno; Christine D Jones; Ethan Cumbler; Kelly McDevitt; Nichole E Carlson; Jason W Stoneback Journal: Perm J Date: 2019-11-01
Authors: Christopher Sciamanna; Noel H Ballentine; Melissa Bopp; Jennifer S Brach; Vernon M Chinchilli; Joseph T Ciccolo; Molly B Conroy; Abigail Fisher; Edward J Fox; Susan L Greenspan; M Jan De Beur Suzanne; Kalen Kearcher; Jennifer L Kraschnewski; Kathleen M McTigue; Edward McAuley; Natalia E Morone; Anuradha Paranjape; Sol Rodriguez-Colon; Andrew Rosenzweig; Joshua M Smyth; Kerry J Stewart; Heather L Stuckey Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: A E Litwic; J E Compston; A Wyman; E S Siris; S H Gehlbach; J D Adachi; R Chapurlat; A Díez-Pérez; A Z LaCroix; J W Nieves; J C Netelenbos; J Pfeilschifter; M Rossini; C Roux; K G Saag; S Silverman; N B Watts; S L Greenspan; L March; C L Gregson; C Cooper; E M Dennison Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Stephen K Liu; Jeffrey C Munson; John-Erik Bell; Rebecca L Zaha; John N Mecchella; Anna N A Tosteson; Nancy E Morden Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 5.562