Literature DB >> 24443384

The potential economic benefits of improved postfracture care: a cost-effectiveness analysis of a fracture liaison service in the US health-care system.

Daniel H Solomon1, Amanda R Patrick, John Schousboe, Elena Losina.   

Abstract

Fractures related to osteoporosis are associated with $20 billion in cost in the United States, with the majority of cost born by federal health-care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Despite the proven fracture reduction benefits of several osteoporosis treatments, less than one-quarter of patients older than 65 years of age who fracture receive such care. A postfracture liaison service (FLS) has been developed in many health systems but has not been widely implemented in the United States. We developed a Markov state-transition computer simulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of an FLS using a health-care system perspective. Using the model, we projected the lifetime costs and benefits of FLS, with or without a bone mineral density test, in men and women who had experienced a hip fracture. We estimated the costs and benefits of an FLS, the probabilities of refracture while on osteoporosis treatment, as well as the utilities associated with various health states from published literature. We used multi-way sensitivity analyses to examine impact of uncertainty in input parameters on cost-effectiveness of FLS. The model estimates that an FLS would result in 153 fewer fractures (109 hip, 5 wrist, 21 spine, 17 other), 37.43 more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and save $66,879 compared with typical postfracture care per every 10,000 postfracture patients. Doubling the cost of the FLS resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $22,993 per QALY. The sensitivity analyses showed that results were robust to plausible ranges of input parameters; assuming the least favorable values of each of the major input parameters results in an ICER of $112,877 per QALY. An FLS targeting patients post-hip fracture should result in cost savings and reduced fractures under most scenarios.
© 2014 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COST-EFFECTIVENESS; FRACTURE LIAISON SERVICE; HIP FRACTURE; OSTEOPOROSIS

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24443384      PMCID: PMC4176766          DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.2180

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  48 in total

Review 1.  Does alendronate reduce the risk of fracture in men? A meta-analysis incorporating prior knowledge of anti-fracture efficacy in women.

Authors:  Anna M Sawka; Alexandra Papaioannou; Jonathan D Adachi; Amiram Gafni; David A Hanley; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2005-07-11       Impact factor: 2.362

2.  Compliance with osteoporosis drug therapy and risk of fracture.

Authors:  D Weycker; D Macarios; J Edelsberg; G Oster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Risk of subsequent fracture after low-trauma fracture in men and women.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Center; Dana Bliuc; Tuan V Nguyen; John A Eisman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Cost-effectiveness of alendronate therapy for osteopenic postmenopausal women.

Authors:  John T Schousboe; John A Nyman; Robert L Kane; Kristine E Ensrud
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-05-03       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Fracture incidence in Olmsted County, Minnesota: comparison of urban with rural rates and changes in urban rates over time.

Authors:  L J Melton; C S Crowson; W M O'Fallon
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Costs and quality of life associated with osteoporosis-related fractures in Sweden.

Authors:  Fredrik Borgström; Niklas Zethraeus; Olof Johnell; Lars Lidgren; Sari Ponzer; Olle Svensson; Peter Abdon; Ewald Ornstein; Karl Lunsjö; Karl Göran Thorngren; Ingemar Sernbo; Clas Rehnberg; Bengt Jönsson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-11-09       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Fracture prevention in Kaiser Permanente Southern California.

Authors:  R Dell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Vertebral fractures and mortality in older women: a prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  D M Kado; W S Browner; L Palermo; M C Nevitt; H K Genant; S R Cummings
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1999-06-14

9.  Hip fracture recurrence. A population-based study.

Authors:  L J Melton; D M Ilstrup; R D Beckenbaugh; B L Riggs
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Fracture risk following an osteoporotic fracture.

Authors:  O Johnell; J A Kanis; A Odén; I Sernbo; I Redlund-Johnell; C Petterson; C De Laet; B Jönsson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-12-23       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  31 in total

1.  Overdiagnosis of osteoporosis: fact or fallacy?

Authors:  J Compston
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening Strategies for Men.

Authors:  Smita Nayak; Susan L Greenspan
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Economic impact and cost-effectiveness of fracture liaison services: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  C-H Wu; I-J Kao; W-C Hung; S-C Lin; H-C Liu; M-H Hsieh; S Bagga; M Achra; T-T Cheng; R-S Yang
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  Fragility fracture programs: are they effective and what is the surgeon's role?

Authors:  Jay S Bender; Eric G Meinberg
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 5.096

5.  Economic evaluation of osteoporosis liaison service for secondary fracture prevention in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients with previous hip fracture in Japan.

Authors:  K Moriwaki; S Noto
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 6.  Quality Measures and Quality Improvement Initiatives in Osteoporosis-an Update.

Authors:  S French; S Choden; Gabriela Schmajuk
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 7.  Fracture liaison services: promoting enhanced bone health care.

Authors:  Juliet Aizer; Marcy B Bolster
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.592

8.  A Guide to Improving the Care of Patients with Fragility Fractures, Edition 2.

Authors:  Simon C Mears; Stephen L Kates
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2015-06

9.  A Comprehensive Fracture Prevention Strategy in Older Adults: The European Union Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS) Statement.

Authors:  H Blain; T Masud; P Dargent-Molina; F C Martin; E Rosendahl; N van der Velde; J Bousquet; A Benetos; C Cooper; J A Kanis; J Y Reginster; R Rizzoli; B Cortet; M Barbagallo; K E Dreinhöfer; B Vellas; S Maggi; T Strandberg
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 4.075

Review 10.  How can the orthopedic surgeon ensure optimal vitamin D status in patients operated for an osteoporotic fracture?

Authors:  T Chevalley; M L Brandi; E Cavalier; N C Harvey; G Iolascon; C Cooper; D Hannouche; J-F Kaux; A Kurth; S Maggi; G Maier; K Papavasiliou; N Al-Daghri; M Sosa-Henríquez; N Suhm; U Tarantino; J-Y Reginster; R Rizzoli
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.