AIM: To evaluate the impact of a fracture prevention clinic service on initiation of treatment, continuing treatment and subsequent minimal trauma fractures (MTF). METHOD: Participants were people aged 50 and over, with a minimal trauma fracture presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) in a large tertiary referral hospital in New South Wales, Australia, between February 2007 and March 2009. A cohort of patients who attended a Fracture Prevention Clinic (clinic group) were compared with a cohort who did not attend the clinic (non-clinic group). A telephone questionnaire was conducted with participants or their carers between December 2010 and April 2011 at least 12 months post-fracture presentation. Questionnaire items included demographics, fracture types, osteoporosis treatment, recurrent fractures and smoking and dietary habits. Data were compared using chi-squared test for categorical variables and Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: Two hundred and fourteen clinic attendees and 220 non-clinic attendees were surveyed between 12 and 40 months (mean 24 months) post-initial fracture. New fracture rates were lower in the clinic group (5.1%) than the non-clinic group (16.4%, P < 0.001). Treatment rates for bone fragility were higher in the clinic group (81.3%) than in the non-clinic group (54.1%, P < 0.001) with 66.8% of the clinic group and 34.1% of the non-clinic group on a bisphosphonate or strontium ranelate at the time of the survey (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients managed by a fracture prevention clinic service following a MTF have fewer new fractures and are more likely to be on treatment for bone fragility.
AIM: To evaluate the impact of a fracture prevention clinic service on initiation of treatment, continuing treatment and subsequent minimal trauma fractures (MTF). METHOD:Participants were people aged 50 and over, with a minimal trauma fracture presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) in a large tertiary referral hospital in New South Wales, Australia, between February 2007 and March 2009. A cohort of patients who attended a Fracture Prevention Clinic (clinic group) were compared with a cohort who did not attend the clinic (non-clinic group). A telephone questionnaire was conducted with participants or their carers between December 2010 and April 2011 at least 12 months post-fracture presentation. Questionnaire items included demographics, fracture types, osteoporosis treatment, recurrent fractures and smoking and dietary habits. Data were compared using chi-squared test for categorical variables and Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: Two hundred and fourteen clinic attendees and 220 non-clinic attendees were surveyed between 12 and 40 months (mean 24 months) post-initial fracture. New fracture rates were lower in the clinic group (5.1%) than the non-clinic group (16.4%, P < 0.001). Treatment rates for bone fragility were higher in the clinic group (81.3%) than in the non-clinic group (54.1%, P < 0.001) with 66.8% of the clinic group and 34.1% of the non-clinic group on a bisphosphonate or strontium ranelate at the time of the survey (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Patients managed by a fracture prevention clinic service following a MTF have fewer new fractures and are more likely to be on treatment for bone fragility.
Authors: R Sujic; D E Beaton; M Mamdani; S M Cadarette; J Luo; S Jaglal; J E M Sale; R Jain; E Bogoch Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: R Okuda; M Osaki; Y Saeki; T Okano; K Tsuda; T Nakamura; Y Morio; H Nagashima; H Hagino Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Cynthia Delgado; Stephanie Shieh; Barbara Grimes; Glenn M Chertow; Lorien S Dalrymple; George A Kaysen; John Kornak; Kirsten L Johansen Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 3.754
Authors: P R Ebeling; D-C Chan; T C Lau; J K Lee; T Songpatanasilp; S H Wong; F L Hew; R Sethi; M Williams Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.507