R Sujic1, D E Beaton2,3,4, M Mamdani3,5,6,7, S M Cadarette6,7,8, J Luo6, S Jaglal6,9,10, J E M Sale2,3, R Jain11, E Bogoch12,13. 1. Musculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. sujicr@smh.ca. 2. Musculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, ON, Canada. 5. Li Ka Shing Centre for Healthcare Analytics Research & Training, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 6. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 8. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. 10. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 11. Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy, Osteoporosis Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada. 12. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 13. Mobility Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
We examined the 5-year refracture rate of 6543 patients and found an overall rate of 9.7%. Adjusted analysis showed that presenting with multiple fractures was an indicator of a higher refracture risk; while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower refracture risk. INTRODUCTION: To examine refractures among patients screened in a province-wide fracture liaison service (FLS). METHODS: We assessed the 5-year refracture rate of fragility fracture patients aged 50+ who were screened at 37 FLS fracture clinics in Ontario, Canada. Refracture was defined as a new hip, pelvis, spine, distal radius, or proximal humerus fracture. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, and index fracture type were used to examine refracture rates. RESULTS: The 5-year refracture rate of 6543 patients was 9.7%. Those presenting with multiple fractures at baseline (i.e., two or more fractures occurring simultaneously) had the highest refracture rate of 19.6%. As compared to the 50-65 age group, refracture risk increased monotonically with age group (66-70 years: HR = 1.3, CI 95%, 1.0-1.7; 71-80 years: HR = 1.7, CI 1.4-2.1; 81+ years: HR = 3.0, CI 2.4-3.7). Relative to distal radius, presenting with multiple fractures at screening was associated with a higher risk of refracture (HR = 2.3 CI 1.6-3.1), while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower risk of refracture (HR = 0.7 CI 0.6-0.9). Sex was not a statistically significant predictor of refracture risk in this cohort (HR = 1.2, CI 1.0-1.5). CONCLUSIONS: One in ten patients in our cohort refractured within 5 years after baseline. Presenting with multiple fractures was an indicator of a higher refracture risk, while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower refracture risk. A more targeted FLS approach may be appropriate for patients at a higher refracture risk.
We examined the 5-year refracture rate of 6543 patients and found an overall rate of 9.7%. Adjusted analysis showed that presenting with multiple fractures was an indicator of a higher refracture risk; while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower refracture risk. INTRODUCTION: To examine refractures among patients screened in a province-wide fracture liaison service (FLS). METHODS: We assessed the 5-year refracture rate of fragility fracturepatients aged 50+ who were screened at 37 FLS fracture clinics in Ontario, Canada. Refracture was defined as a new hip, pelvis, spine, distal radius, or proximal humerus fracture. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, and index fracture type were used to examine refracture rates. RESULTS: The 5-year refracture rate of 6543 patients was 9.7%. Those presenting with multiple fractures at baseline (i.e., two or more fractures occurring simultaneously) had the highest refracture rate of 19.6%. As compared to the 50-65 age group, refracture risk increased monotonically with age group (66-70 years: HR = 1.3, CI 95%, 1.0-1.7; 71-80 years: HR = 1.7, CI 1.4-2.1; 81+ years: HR = 3.0, CI 2.4-3.7). Relative to distal radius, presenting with multiple fractures at screening was associated with a higher risk of refracture (HR = 2.3 CI 1.6-3.1), while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower risk of refracture (HR = 0.7 CI 0.6-0.9). Sex was not a statistically significant predictor of refracture risk in this cohort (HR = 1.2, CI 1.0-1.5). CONCLUSIONS: One in ten patients in our cohort refractured within 5 years after baseline. Presenting with multiple fractures was an indicator of a higher refracture risk, while presenting with an ankle fracture was associated with a lower refracture risk. A more targeted FLS approach may be appropriate for patients at a higher refracture risk.
Authors: Carl T Hasselman; Molly T Vogt; Katie L Stone; Jane A Cauley; Stephen F Conti Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Alexandra Papaioannou; Suzanne Morin; Angela M Cheung; Stephanie Atkinson; Jacques P Brown; Sidney Feldman; David A Hanley; Anthony Hodsman; Sophie A Jamal; Stephanie M Kaiser; Brent Kvern; Kerry Siminoski; William D Leslie Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-10-12 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Patrick Haentjens; Jay Magaziner; Cathleen S Colón-Emeric; Dirk Vanderschueren; Koen Milisen; Brigitte Velkeniers; Steven Boonen Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: D E Beaton; M Vidmar; K B Pitzul; R Sujic; N K Rotondi; E R Bogoch; J E M Sale; R Jain; J Weldon Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2016-10-21 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: S B Jaglal; G Hawker; C Cameron; J Canavan; D Beaton; E Bogoch; R Jain; A Papaioannou Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2010-03-23 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: John Van der Kallen; Michelle Giles; Kerry Cooper; Kerry Gill; Vicki Parker; Agness Tembo; Gabor Major; Linda Ross; Jan Carter Journal: Int J Rheum Dis Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 2.454
Authors: Dorcas E Beaton; Muhammad Mamdani; Hong Zheng; Susan Jaglal; Suzanne M Cadarette; Earl R Bogoch; Joanna E M Sale; Rebeka Sujic; Ravi Jain Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: O O Babatunde; M Bucknall; C Burton; J J Forsyth; N Corp; S Gwilym; Z Paskins; D A van der Windt Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 4.507