F A McAlister1,2, C Ye3, L A Beaupre4, B H Rowe5, J A Johnson6, D Bellerose3, I Hassan7, S R Majumdar3. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Finlay.McAlister@ualberta.ca. 2. Clinical Sciences Building, University of Alberta, 11350 83 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2G3, Canada. Finlay.McAlister@ualberta.ca. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 6. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 7. EPICORE Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Abstract
Despite their proven efficacy for secondary fracture prevention, long-term adherence with oral bisphosphonates is poor. INTRODUCTION: To compare the effectiveness of two interventions on long-term oral bisphosphonate adherence after an upper extremity fragility fracture. METHODS:Community-dwelling participants 50 years or older with upper extremity fragility fractures not previously treated withbisphosphonates were randomized to either a multi-faceted patient and physician educational intervention (the active control arm) vs. a nurse-led case manager (the study arm). Primary outcome was adherence (taking > 80% of prescribed doses) with prescribed oral bisphosphonates at 12 months postfracture between groups; secondary outcomes included rates of primary non-adherence and 24-month adherence. We also compared quality of life between adherent and non-adherent patients. RESULTS: By 12 months, adherence with the initially prescribed bisphosphonate was similar (p = 0.96) in both groups: 38/48 (79.2%) in the educational intervention group vs. 66/83 (79.5%) in the case manager arm. By 24 months, adherence rates were 67% (32/48) in the educational intervention group vs. 53% (43/81) in case managed patients (p = 0.13). Primary non-adherence was 6% (11 patients) in the educational interventiongroup and 12% (21 patients) in the case managed group (p = 0.07). Prior family history of osteoporosis (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.4) and being satisfied with current medical care (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.8) were associated with better adherence while lower income (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6, for patients with income < $30,000 per annum) was associated with poorer rates of adherence. There were no differences in health-related quality of life scores at baseline or during follow-up between patients who were adherent and those who were not. CONCLUSION: While both interventions achieved higher oral bisphosphonate adherence compared to previously reported adherence rates in the general population, primary non-adherence and long-term adherence to bisphosphonates were similar in both arms. Adherence was influenced by family history of osteoporosis, satisfaction with current medical care, and income. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01401556.
RCT Entities:
Despite their proven efficacy for secondary fracture prevention, long-term adherence with oral bisphosphonates is poor. INTRODUCTION: To compare the effectiveness of two interventions on long-term oral bisphosphonate adherence after an upper extremity fragility fracture. METHODS: Community-dwelling participants 50 years or older with upper extremity fragility fractures not previously treated with bisphosphonates were randomized to either a multi-faceted patient and physician educational intervention (the active control arm) vs. a nurse-led case manager (the study arm). Primary outcome was adherence (taking > 80% of prescribed doses) with prescribed oral bisphosphonates at 12 months postfracture between groups; secondary outcomes included rates of primary non-adherence and 24-month adherence. We also compared quality of life between adherent and non-adherent patients. RESULTS: By 12 months, adherence with the initially prescribed bisphosphonate was similar (p = 0.96) in both groups: 38/48 (79.2%) in the educational intervention group vs. 66/83 (79.5%) in the case manager arm. By 24 months, adherence rates were 67% (32/48) in the educational intervention group vs. 53% (43/81) in case managed patients (p = 0.13). Primary non-adherence was 6% (11 patients) in the educational intervention group and 12% (21 patients) in the case managed group (p = 0.07). Prior family history of osteoporosis (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.4) and being satisfied with current medical care (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.8) were associated with better adherence while lower income (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6, for patients with income < $30,000 per annum) was associated with poorer rates of adherence. There were no differences in health-related quality of life scores at baseline or during follow-up between patients who were adherent and those who were not. CONCLUSION: While both interventions achieved higher oral bisphosphonate adherence compared to previously reported adherence rates in the general population, primary non-adherence and long-term adherence to bisphosphonates were similar in both arms. Adherence was influenced by family history of osteoporosis, satisfaction with current medical care, and income. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01401556.
Authors: Michael T Halpern; Zeba M Khan; Jordana K Schmier; Michel Burnier; J Jaime Caro; Joyce Cramer; William L Daley; Jerry Gurwitz; Norman K Hollenberg Journal: Hypertension Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: M Alan Brookhart; Amanda R Patrick; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jerry Avorn; Colin Dormuth; William Shrank; Boris L G van Wijk; Suzanne M Cadarette; Claire F Canning; Daniel H Solomon Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2007-04-23
Authors: Robby Nieuwlaat; Nancy Wilczynski; Tamara Navarro; Nicholas Hobson; Rebecca Jeffery; Arun Keepanasseril; Thomas Agoritsas; Niraj Mistry; Alfonso Iorio; Susan Jack; Bhairavi Sivaramalingam; Emma Iserman; Reem A Mustafa; Dawn Jedraszewski; Chris Cotoi; R Brian Haynes Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-11-20
Authors: J A Kanis; O Johnell; C De Laet; H Johansson; A Oden; P Delmas; J Eisman; S Fujiwara; P Garnero; H Kroger; E V McCloskey; D Mellstrom; L J Melton; H Pols; J Reeve; A Silman; A Tenenhouse Journal: Bone Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Sumit R Majumdar; Finlay A McAlister; Jeffrey A Johnson; Brian H Rowe; Debbie Bellerose; Imran Hassan; Douglas A Lier; Stephanie Li; Walter P Maksymowych; Matthew Menon; Anthony S Russell; Brian Wirzba; Lauren A Beaupre Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Dana Bliuc; Nguyen D Nguyen; Vivienne E Milch; Tuan V Nguyen; John A Eisman; Jacqueline R Center Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-02-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Paul J Mitchell; Cyrus Cooper; Masaki Fujita; Philippe Halbout; Kristina Åkesson; Matthew Costa; Karsten E Dreinhöfer; David R Marsh; Joon-Kiong Lee; Ding-Cheng Derrick Chan; M Kassim Javaid Journal: Curr Osteoporos Rep Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 5.096
Authors: Alba Sánchez-Viñas; Carmen Corral-Partearroyo; Montserrat Gil-Girbau; M Teresa Peñarrubia-María; Carmen Gallardo-González; María-Del-Carmen Olmos-Palenzuela; Ignacio Aznar-Lou; Antoni Serrano-Blanco; Maria Rubio-Valera Journal: BMC Prim Care Date: 2022-07-05
Authors: M K Javaid; A Sami; W Lems; P Mitchell; T Thomas; A Singer; R Speerin; M Fujita; D D Pierroz; K Akesson; P Halbout; S Ferrari; C Cooper Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 4.507