Literature DB >> 31625042

At Odds About the Odds: Women's Choices to Accept Osteoporosis Medications Do Not Closely Agree with Physician-Set Treatment Thresholds.

Emma O Billington1,2, A Lynn Feasel3, Gregory A Kline4,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis guidelines recommend pharmacologic therapy based on 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture, which may fail to account for patient-specific experiences and values.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether patient decisions to initiate osteoporosis medication agree with guideline-recommended intervention thresholds. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort study included women aged ≥ 45 with age-associated osteoporosis who attended a group osteoporosis self-management consultation at a tertiary osteoporosis center. INTERVENTION: A group osteoporosis self-management consultation, during which participants received osteoporosis education and then calculated1 their 10-year MOF and hip fracture risk using FRAX and2 their predicted absolute fracture risk with therapy (assuming 40% relative reduction). Participants then made autonomous decisions regarding treatment initiation. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated agreement between treatment decisions and physician-set intervention thresholds (10-year MOF risk ≥ 20%, hip fracture risk ≥ 3%). KEY
RESULTS: Among 85 women (median [IQR] age 62 [58-67]), 27% accepted treatment (median [IQR] MOF risk, 15.1% [9.9-22.0]; hip fracture risk, 3.3% [1.3-5.3]), 46% declined (MOF risk, 9.5% [6.5-11.6]; hip fracture risk, 1.8% [0.6-2.3]), and 27% remained undecided (MOF risk, 14.0% [9.8-20.2]; hip fracture risk, 4.4% [1.7-4.9]). There was wide overlap in fracture risk between treatment acceptors and non-acceptors. Odds of accepting treatment were higher in women with prior fragility fracture (50% accepted; OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.9-15.2; p = 0.0015) and with hip fracture risk ≥ 3% (32% accepted; OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.4-9.2; p = 0.012), but not MOF risk ≥ 20% (47% accepted; OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.0-8.5; p = 0.105).
CONCLUSIONS: Informed decisions to start osteoporosis treatment are highly personal and not easily predicted using fracture risk. Guideline-recommended intervention thresholds may not permit sufficient consideration of patient preferences.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bisphosphonates; fracture; osteoporosis; patient education; patient preference; shared decision-making

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31625042      PMCID: PMC6957614          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05384-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  33 in total

Review 1.  Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines.

Authors:  S H Woolf; R Grol; A Hutchinson; M Eccles; J Grimshaw
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-02-20

2.  Shared decision making in hypertension: the impact of patient preferences on treatment choice.

Authors:  A A Montgomery; J Harding; T Fahey
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.267

3.  Medical Facts versus Value Judgments--Toward Preference-Sensitive Guidelines.

Authors:  Peter A Ubel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Frequency of discontinuation of injectable osteoporosis therapies in US patients over 2 years.

Authors:  A Modi; S Sajjan; R Insinga; J Weaver; E M Lewiecki; S T Harris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  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

6.  When should hypertension be treated? The different perspectives of Canadian family physicians and patients.

Authors:  F A McAlister; A M O'Connor; G Wells; S A Grover; A Laupacis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-08-22       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  The importance of physicians' risk perception in osteoporosis treatment decision making.

Authors:  Joan M Neuner; Marilyn M Schapira
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 2.617

8.  Why do women reject bisphosphonates for osteoporosis? A videographic study.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Scoville; Paula Ponce de Leon Lovaton; Nilay D Shah; Laurie J Pencille; Victor M Montori
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Economic evaluation of a population-based osteoporosis intervention for outpatients with non-traumatic non-hip fractures: the "Catch a Break" 1i [type C] FLS.

Authors:  S R Majumdar; D A Lier; D A Hanley; A G Juby; L A Beaupre
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Osteoporosis medication use after hip fracture in U.S. patients between 2002 and 2011.

Authors:  Daniel H Solomon; Stephen S Johnston; Natalie N Boytsov; Donna McMorrow; Joseph M Lane; Kelly D Krohn
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  4 in total

1.  Group medical consultation for osteoporosis: a prospective pilot study of patient experience in Canadian tertiary care.

Authors:  Emma O Billington; A Lynn Feasel; Jessica L VanDyke; Gregory A Kline
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Simulated effects of early menopausal bone mineral density preservation on long-term fracture risk: a feasibility study.

Authors:  E O Billington; W D Leslie; J P Brown; J C Prior; S N Morin; C S Kovacs; S M Kaiser; B C Lentle; T Anastassiades; T Towheed; G A Kline
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Patient engagement in clinical guidelines development: input from > 1000 members of the Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network.

Authors:  S N Morin; M Djekic-Ivankovic; L Funnell; L Giangregorio; I B Rodrigues; R Ridout; S Feldman; S Kim; H McDonald-Blumer; G Kline; W E Ward; N Santesso; W D Leslie
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-12-14       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Rates of Osteoporosis Management and Secondary Preventative Treatment After Primary Fragility Fractures.

Authors:  Bailey J Ross; Olivia C Lee; Mitchel B Harris; Thomas C Dowd; Felix H Savoie; William F Sherman
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2021-06-14
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.