Colin M Curtain1, Mackenzie Williams2, Justin M Cousins2, Gregory M Peterson2, Tania Winzenberg3,4. 1. Unit for Medication Outcomes Research and Education, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. Colin.curtain@utas.edu.au. 2. Unit for Medication Outcomes Research and Education, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 3. School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 4. Menzies Institute for Medical Research and Faculty of Health, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is currently recommended in Australia that nursing home residents are supplemented daily with 1000 IU vitamin D as they are at an increased risk of fractures. Historically, supplementation has been low, and current supplementation prevalence is not known. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of vitamin D supplementation amongst nursing home residents in Tasmania, Australia. METHODS: Resident data, including demographics, medical conditions and medications (including vitamin D and calcium supplement use), exercise and sun exposure, were obtained from residents' files and staff in consenting nursing homes. Dietary calcium intake was estimated from the weekly menu of one nursing home and total calcium intake estimated from this and calcium supplement use. The prevalence of vitamin D supplementation was compared by resident characteristics and fracture risk factors. RESULTS: Of 811 residents, 409 (50 %) received daily vitamin D supplementation of at least 1000 IU. Residents receiving vitamin D supplementation were slightly younger (mean 83 vs. 85 years for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.003) and more likely to have osteoporosis (29 vs. 22 % for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.019). Only 43 % of residents with osteoporosis received vitamin D supplements. Most residents (86 %) did not have regular sunlight exposure. The median estimated total calcium intake of 800 ± 275 mg daily was below guideline recommendations of 1000-1300 mg daily. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of vitamin D supplementation in nursing home residents was relatively low, suggesting poor adherence to the relevant clinical guidelines. Additionally, most residents do not access sunlight. Interventions addressing this evidence-practice gap are needed.
BACKGROUND: It is currently recommended in Australia that nursing home residents are supplemented daily with 1000 IU vitamin D as they are at an increased risk of fractures. Historically, supplementation has been low, and current supplementation prevalence is not known. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of vitamin D supplementation amongst nursing home residents in Tasmania, Australia. METHODS: Resident data, including demographics, medical conditions and medications (including vitamin D and calcium supplement use), exercise and sun exposure, were obtained from residents' files and staff in consenting nursing homes. Dietary calcium intake was estimated from the weekly menu of one nursing home and total calcium intake estimated from this and calcium supplement use. The prevalence of vitamin D supplementation was compared by resident characteristics and fracture risk factors. RESULTS: Of 811 residents, 409 (50 %) received daily vitamin D supplementation of at least 1000 IU. Residents receiving vitamin D supplementation were slightly younger (mean 83 vs. 85 years for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.003) and more likely to have osteoporosis (29 vs. 22 % for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.019). Only 43 % of residents with osteoporosis received vitamin D supplements. Most residents (86 %) did not have regular sunlight exposure. The median estimated total calcium intake of 800 ± 275 mg daily was below guideline recommendations of 1000-1300 mg daily. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of vitamin D supplementation in nursing home residents was relatively low, suggesting poor adherence to the relevant clinical guidelines. Additionally, most residents do not access sunlight. Interventions addressing this evidence-practice gap are needed.
Authors: Caryl A Nowson; John J McGrath; Peter R Ebeling; Anjali Haikerwal; Robin M Daly; Kerrie M Sanders; Markus J Seibel; Rebecca S Mason Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Tari D Topolski; James LoGerfo; Donald L Patrick; Barbara Williams; Julie Walwick; Marsha B Patrick Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2006-09-15 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: R Rizzoli; S Boonen; M-L Brandi; O Bruyère; C Cooper; J A Kanis; J-M Kaufman; J D Ringe; G Weryha; J-Y Reginster Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: René Rizzoli; John C Stevenson; Jürgen M Bauer; Luc J C van Loon; Stéphane Walrand; John A Kanis; Cyrus Cooper; Maria-Luisa Brandi; Adolfo Diez-Perez; Jean-Yves Reginster Journal: Maturitas Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 4.342