Literature DB >> 30907968

Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review.

Patricia Barrionuevo1, Michael R Gionfriddo2,3, Ana Castaneda-Guarderas2, Claudia Zeballos-Palacios2, Pavithra Bora1,4, Khaled Mohammed1, Khalid Benkhadra1,5, Maria Sarigianni1, Mohammad Hassan Murad1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several treatments are available to reduce the risk of fragility fractures associated with osteoporosis. The choice of treatment requires knowledge of patients' values and preferences. The aim of the present study was to summarize what is known about the values and preferences relevant to the management of osteoporosis in women.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases for studies reported in any language that had included women who had already started or were about to start any pharmacological therapy for osteoporosis. Pairs of reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. The results were synthesized narratively.
RESULTS: We included 26 studies reporting on 15,348 women (mean age, 66 years). The women considered the effectiveness and adverse events equally, followed by the convenience of taking the drug and its effect on daily routine (less frequent dosing was preferred, the oral route was preferred, and the injectable route was preferred over oral if given less frequently). The treatment cost and duration were less important factors for decision making. Fear of breast cancer and fear of resuming uterine bleeding were common reasons for not choosing estrogen therapy. Calcium and vitamin D were viewed as safe and natural. Across the studies, the preferences were not affected by age, previous drug exposure, or employment status.
CONCLUSIONS: Women starting osteoporosis medications value effectiveness and side effects equally and prefer medications given less frequently. Injectable drugs appear acceptable if given less frequently. More research on patient values and preferences is needed to guide decision making in osteoporosis.
Copyright © 2019 Endocrine Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30907968      PMCID: PMC7296202          DOI: 10.1210/jc.2019-00193

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab        ISSN: 0021-972X            Impact factor:   5.958


  13 in total

Review 1.  Patient values and preferences in decision making for antithrombotic therapy: a systematic review: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Samantha MacLean; Sohail Mulla; Elie A Akl; Milosz Jankowski; Per Olav Vandvik; Shanil Ebrahim; Shelley McLeod; Neera Bhatnagar; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Andrews; Holger J Schünemann; Andrew D Oxman; Kevin Pottie; Joerg J Meerpohl; Pablo Alonso Coello; David Rind; Victor M Montori; Juan Pablo Brito; Susan Norris; Mahmoud Elbarbary; Piet Post; Mona Nasser; Vijay Shukla; Roman Jaeschke; Jan Brozek; Ben Djulbegovic; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Differences between perspectives of physicians and patients on anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation: observational study.

Authors:  P J Devereaux; D R Anderson; M J Gardner; W Putnam; G J Flowerdew; B F Brownell; S Nagpal; J L Cox
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-11-24

4.  Use of a decision aid to improve treatment decisions in osteoporosis: the osteoporosis choice randomized trial.

Authors:  Victor M Montori; Nilay D Shah; Laurie J Pencille; Megan E Branda; Holly K Van Houten; Brian A Swiglo; Rebecca L Kesman; Sidna M Tulledge-Scheitel; Thomas M Jaeger; Ruth E Johnson; Gregory A Bartel; L Joseph Melton; Robert A Wermers
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.965

5.  Alterations of cortical and trabecular architecture are associated with fractures in postmenopausal women, partially independent of decreased BMD measured by DXA: the OFELY study.

Authors:  Elisabeth Sornay-Rendu; Stéphanie Boutroy; Françoise Munoz; Pierre D Delmas
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 6.  Clinical review. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mohammad Hassan Murad; Matthew T Drake; Rebecca J Mullan; Karen F Mauck; Louise M Stuart; Melanie A Lane; Nisrin O Abu Elnour; Patricia J Erwin; Ahmad Hazem; Milo A Puhan; Tianjing Li; Victor M Montori
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 5.958

7.  Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Patricia Barrionuevo; Michael R Gionfriddo; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Pavithra Bora; Khaled Mohammed; Khalid Benkhadra; Maria Sarigianni; Mohammad Hassan Murad
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 8.  The burden of osteoporosis: cost.

Authors:  R Lindsay
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1995-02-27       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: an approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual).

Authors:  Simon Lewin; Claire Glenton; Heather Munthe-Kaas; Benedicte Carlsen; Christopher J Colvin; Metin Gülmezoglu; Jane Noyes; Andrew Booth; Ruth Garside; Arash Rashidian
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  5 in total

1.  Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Patricia Barrionuevo; Michael R Gionfriddo; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Pavithra Bora; Khaled Mohammed; Khalid Benkhadra; Maria Sarigianni; Mohammad Hassan Murad
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 2.  Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Daksh Choudhary; Megan Thomas; Kevin Pacheco-Barrios; Yuan Zhang; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger Schünemann; Glen Hazlewood
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 3.481

3.  The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  M S LeBoff; S L Greenspan; K L Insogna; E M Lewiecki; K G Saag; A J Singer; E S Siris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 5.071

4.  Clinical Practice Guidelines on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: *An Executive Summary and Recommendations - Update 2019-2020.

Authors:  Meeta Meeta; C V Harinarayan; Raman Marwah; Rakesh Sahay; Sanjay Kalra; Sushrut Babhulkar
Journal:  J Midlife Health       Date:  2020-08-10

Review 5.  Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Curtis; Jean-Yves Reginster; Nasser Al-Daghri; Emmanuel Biver; Maria Luisa Brandi; Etienne Cavalier; Peyman Hadji; Philippe Halbout; Nicholas C Harvey; Mickaël Hiligsmann; M Kassim Javaid; John A Kanis; Jean-Marc Kaufman; Olivier Lamy; Radmila Matijevic; Adolfo Diez Perez; Régis Pierre Radermecker; Mário Miguel Rosa; Thierry Thomas; Friederike Thomasius; Mila Vlaskovska; René Rizzoli; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 4.481

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.