E Casado1, J Blanch2, C Carbonell3,4, J C Bastida5,6, J L Pérez-Castrillón7, L Canals8, L Lizán9,10. 1. Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital Universitari Parc Taulí (UAB), Sabadell, Spain. 2. Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Instituto Catalán de la Salud (ICS), Barcelona, Spain. 4. Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Medicina de familia, centro de Salud de Marín, Pontevedra, Spain. 6. Coordinador nacional Grupo de Osteoporosis SEMG, Pontevedra, Spain. 7. Servicio Medicina Interna, Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega, Valladolid, Spain. 8. Amgen (Europe) GmBH, Rotkreuz, Switzerland. 9. Outcomes'10, Castellón, Spain. lizan@outcomes10.com. 10. Departamento de Medicina, Universidad Jaime I, Castellón, Spain. lizan@outcomes10.com.
Abstract
The study aimed to achieve expert consensus to optimize secondary fracture prevention in Spain. Relevant gaps in current patient management were identified. However, some aspects were considered difficult to apply. Future efforts should focus on those items with greatest divergences between importance and feasibility. PURPOSE: To establish a Spanish multidisciplinary expert consensus on secondary fracture prevention. METHODS: A two-round Delphi consensus was conducted, guided by a Scientific Committee. The 43-item study questionnaire was designed from a literature review and a subsequent multidisciplinary expert group (n = 12) discussion. The first-round questionnaire, using a 7-point Likert scale, assessed the experts' opinion of the current situation, their wish for items to happen, and their prognosis that items would be implemented within 5 years. Items for which consensus was not achieved were included in the second round. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement or ≥ 75% disagreement. A total of 102 experts from 14 scientific societies were invited to participate. RESULTS: A total of 75 (response rate 73.5%) and 69 (92.0%) experts answered the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively. Participants mean age was 51.8 years [standard deviation (SD): 10.1 years]; being 24.0% rheumatologists, 21.3% primary care physicians, 14.7% geriatricians, 8.0% internal medicine specialists, 8.0% rehabilitation physicians, and 8.0% gynecologists. Consensus was achieved for 79.1% of items (wish, 100%; prognosis, 58.1%). Effective secondary prevention strategies identified as requiring improvement included: clinical report standardization, effective hospital primary care communication (telephone/mail and case managers), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires use, and treatment compliance monitoring (prognosis agreement 33.3%, 47.8%, 18.8%, and 55.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: A consensus was reached by health professionals in their wish to implement strategies to optimize secondary fracture prevention; however, they considered some difficult to apply. Efforts should focus on those items with currently low application and those with greatest divergence between wish and prognosis.
The study aimed to achieve expert consensus to optimize secondary fracture prevention in Spain. Relevant gaps in current patient management were identified. However, some aspects were considered difficult to apply. Future efforts should focus on those items with greatest divergences between importance and feasibility. PURPOSE: To establish a Spanish multidisciplinary expert consensus on secondary fracture prevention. METHODS: A two-round Delphi consensus was conducted, guided by a Scientific Committee. The 43-item study questionnaire was designed from a literature review and a subsequent multidisciplinary expert group (n = 12) discussion. The first-round questionnaire, using a 7-point Likert scale, assessed the experts' opinion of the current situation, their wish for items to happen, and their prognosis that items would be implemented within 5 years. Items for which consensus was not achieved were included in the second round. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement or ≥ 75% disagreement. A total of 102 experts from 14 scientific societies were invited to participate. RESULTS: A total of 75 (response rate 73.5%) and 69 (92.0%) experts answered the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively. Participants mean age was 51.8 years [standard deviation (SD): 10.1 years]; being 24.0% rheumatologists, 21.3% primary care physicians, 14.7% geriatricians, 8.0% internal medicine specialists, 8.0% rehabilitation physicians, and 8.0% gynecologists. Consensus was achieved for 79.1% of items (wish, 100%; prognosis, 58.1%). Effective secondary prevention strategies identified as requiring improvement included: clinical report standardization, effective hospital primary care communication (telephone/mail and case managers), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires use, and treatment compliance monitoring (prognosis agreement 33.3%, 47.8%, 18.8%, and 55.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: A consensus was reached by health professionals in their wish to implement strategies to optimize secondary fracture prevention; however, they considered some difficult to apply. Efforts should focus on those items with currently low application and those with greatest divergence between wish and prognosis.
Authors: Earl R Bogoch; Victoria Elliot-Gibson; Dorcas E Beaton; Sophie A Jamal; Robert G Josse; Timothy M Murray Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: C Ojeda-Thies; P Sáez-López; C T Currie; F J Tarazona-Santalbina; T Alarcón; A Muñoz-Pascual; T Pareja; P Gómez-Campelo; N Montero-Fernández; J Mora-Fernández; R Larrainzar-Garijo; E Gil-Garay; I Etxebarría-Foronda; J R Caeiro; A Díez-Pérez; D Prieto-Alhambra; L Navarro-Castellanos; A Otero-Puime; J I González-Montalvo Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-03-23 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: J A Kanis; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; B Abrahamsen; N M Al-Daghri; M L Brandi; J Cannata-Andia; B Cortet; H P Dimai; S Ferrari; P Hadji; N C Harvey; M Kraenzlin; A Kurth; E McCloskey; S Minisola; T Thomas; J-Y Reginster Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: D Prieto-Alhambra; D Moral-Cuesta; A Palmer; I Aguado-Maestro; M F Bravo Bardaji; F Brañas; G Adrados Bueno; J R Caeiro-Rey; I Andrés Cano; M Barres-Carsi; L Gracia Delgado; M Salomó-Domènech; I Etxebarria-Foronda; B Llado Ferrer; S Mills; L Ezquerra Herrando; D Mifsut; L D R Evangelista; X Nogués; I Perez-Coto; J Martínez-Iñiguez Blasco; C Martín-Hernández; H Kessel; J Teixidor Serra; J Rodriguez Solis; O Torregrosa Suau; E Vaquero-Cervino; C Pablos Hernández; L Rodríguez Mañas; A Herrera; A Díez-Perez Journal: Arch Osteoporos Date: 2019-05-29 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: K Akesson; D Marsh; P J Mitchell; A R McLellan; J Stenmark; D D Pierroz; C Kyer; C Cooper Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 4.507