UNLABELLED: The quality of life during the first 4 months after fracture was estimated in 2,808 fractured patients from 11 countries. Analysis showed that there were significant differences in the quality of life (QoL) loss between countries. Other factors such as QoL prior fracture and hospitalisation also had a significant impact on the QoL loss. INTRODUCTION: The International Costs and Utilities Related to Osteoporotic Fractures Study (ICUROS) was initiated in 2007 with the objective of estimating costs and quality of life related to fractures in several countries worldwide. The ICUROS is ongoing and enrols patients in 11 countries (Australia, Austria, Estonia, France, Italy, Lithuania, Mexico, Russia, Spain, UK and the USA). The objective of this paper is to outline the study design of ICUROS and present results regarding the QoL (measured using the EQ-5D) during the first 4 months after fracture based on the patients that have been thus far enrolled ICUROS. METHODS: ICUROS uses a prospective study design where data (costs and quality of life) are collected in four phases over 18 months after fracture. All countries use the same core case report forms. Quality of life was collected using the EQ-5D instrument and a time trade-off questionnaire. RESULTS: The total sample for the analysis was 2,808 patients (1,273 hip, 987 distal forearm and 548 vertebral fracture). For all fracture types and countries, the QoL was reduced significantly after fracture compared to pre-fracture QoL. A regression analysis showed that there were significant differences in the QoL loss between countries. Also, a higher level of QoL prior to the fracture significantly increased the QoL loss and patients who were hospitalised for their fracture also had a significantly higher loss compared to those who were not. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this study indicate that there appear to be important variations in the QoL decrements related to fracture between countries.
UNLABELLED: The quality of life during the first 4 months after fracture was estimated in 2,808 fracturedpatients from 11 countries. Analysis showed that there were significant differences in the quality of life (QoL) loss between countries. Other factors such as QoL prior fracture and hospitalisation also had a significant impact on the QoL loss. INTRODUCTION: The International Costs and Utilities Related to Osteoporotic Fractures Study (ICUROS) was initiated in 2007 with the objective of estimating costs and quality of life related to fractures in several countries worldwide. The ICUROS is ongoing and enrols patients in 11 countries (Australia, Austria, Estonia, France, Italy, Lithuania, Mexico, Russia, Spain, UK and the USA). The objective of this paper is to outline the study design of ICUROS and present results regarding the QoL (measured using the EQ-5D) during the first 4 months after fracture based on the patients that have been thus far enrolled ICUROS. METHODS: ICUROS uses a prospective study design where data (costs and quality of life) are collected in four phases over 18 months after fracture. All countries use the same core case report forms. Quality of life was collected using the EQ-5D instrument and a time trade-off questionnaire. RESULTS: The total sample for the analysis was 2,808 patients (1,273 hip, 987 distal forearm and 548 vertebral fracture). For all fracture types and countries, the QoL was reduced significantly after fracture compared to pre-fracture QoL. A regression analysis showed that there were significant differences in the QoL loss between countries. Also, a higher level of QoL prior to the fracture significantly increased the QoL loss and patients who were hospitalised for their fracture also had a significantly higher loss compared to those who were not. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this study indicate that there appear to be important variations in the QoL decrements related to fracture between countries.
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: Saskia Knies; Silvia M A A Evers; Math J J M Candel; Johan L Severens; André J H A Ament Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2009 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Dennis G Fryback; Nancy Cross Dunham; Mari Palta; Janel Hanmer; Jennifer Buechner; Dasha Cherepanov; Shani A Herrington; Ron D Hays; Robert M Kaplan; Theodore G Ganiats; David Feeny; Paul Kind Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: W Cockerill; M Lunt; A J Silman; C Cooper; P Lips; A K Bhalla; J B Cannata; R Eastell; D Felsenberg; C Gennari; O Johnell; J A Kanis; C Kiss; P Masaryk; M Naves; G Poor; H Raspe; D M Reid; J Reeve; J Stepan; C Todd; A D Woolf; T W O'Neill Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-11-13 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: M Jürisson; H Pisarev; J Kanis; F Borgström; A Svedbom; R Kallikorm; M Lember; A Uusküla Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: K Renerts; K Fischer; B Dawson-Hughes; E J Orav; G Freystaetter; H-P Simmen; H-C Pape; A Egli; R Theiler; H A Bischoff-Ferrari Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-02-09 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Fanni Rencz; László Gulácsi; Michael Drummond; Dominik Golicki; Valentina Prevolnik Rupel; Judit Simon; Elly A Stolk; Valentin Brodszky; Petra Baji; Jakub Závada; Guenka Petrova; Alexandru Rotar; Márta Péntek Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: H P Dimai; A Svedbom; A Fahrleitner-Pammer; H Resch; C Muschitz; H Thaler; M Szivak; K Amrein; F Borgström Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: A Gaipov; O Cseprekal; P K Potukuchi; K Kabulbayev; A Remport; Z Mathe; M Talwar; V Balaraman; T Fülöp; J D Eason; I Mucsi; C P Kovesdy; M Z Molnar Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: C Bliemel; R Sielski; B Doering; R Dodel; M Balzer-Geldsetzer; S Ruchholtz; B Buecking Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 4.507