Kyriakos Souliotis1,2, Christina Golna3, Paul Golnas3, Ioannis-Anestis Markakis3, Polyzois Makras4. 1. Department of Social and Education Policy, University of Peloponnese, Corinth, Greece. ksouliotis@uop.gr. 2. The Health Policy Institute, Maroussi, Greece. ksouliotis@uop.gr. 3. The Health Policy Institute, Maroussi, Greece. 4. Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes and Department of Medical Research, 251 Hellenic Air Force and VA General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening and linkage to care (SLTC) for osteoporosis is suboptimal in several settings. In Greece, it is estimated that only up to 8.6% of postmenopausal women are SLTC for osteoporosis, despite having suffered a previous fracture. AIMS: This study aims to estimate the impact of comprehensive screening on future fracture burden amongst post-menopausal women aged 50-74, with one prior osteoporotic fracture, in Greece. METHODS: We developed a cohort stochastic model, based on published epidemiological and clinical data, to assess impact of screening on future fracture burden in two scenarios: a current, assuming an 8.6% background SLTC, and a completely hypothetical, assuming 100% SLTC. RESULTS: Amongst a cohort of 50,000 post-menopausal women aged 50-74, with one prior osteoporotic fracture, applying the hypothetical versus the current scenario would result in a reduction in deaths (-0.6%) and fractures (-4.3%) over 10 years. The hypothetical scenario leads to greater reductions in costs associated with vertebral (-8.1%) and hip (-5.5%) fractures, followed by other non-vertebral (-3.0%) and forearm (-2.5%) fractures. In the hypothetical scenario, treatment initiations and total screenings increased almost tenfold versus the current scenario, at an estimated direct incremental cost of 27.83€ per woman per year in the cohort. DISCUSSION: Our study adds to the existing evidence on the impact of screening to prevent fractures amongst post-menopausal women. Despite being based on a stochastic model, our study confirms findings most recently published in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: Our study models the positive public health impact of increasing SLTC levels amongst post-menopausal women with a prior osteoporotic fracture.
BACKGROUND: Screening and linkage to care (SLTC) for osteoporosis is suboptimal in several settings. In Greece, it is estimated that only up to 8.6% of postmenopausal women are SLTC for osteoporosis, despite having suffered a previous fracture. AIMS: This study aims to estimate the impact of comprehensive screening on future fracture burden amongst post-menopausal women aged 50-74, with one prior osteoporotic fracture, in Greece. METHODS: We developed a cohort stochastic model, based on published epidemiological and clinical data, to assess impact of screening on future fracture burden in two scenarios: a current, assuming an 8.6% background SLTC, and a completely hypothetical, assuming 100% SLTC. RESULTS: Amongst a cohort of 50,000 post-menopausal women aged 50-74, with one prior osteoporotic fracture, applying the hypothetical versus the current scenario would result in a reduction in deaths (-0.6%) and fractures (-4.3%) over 10 years. The hypothetical scenario leads to greater reductions in costs associated with vertebral (-8.1%) and hip (-5.5%) fractures, followed by other non-vertebral (-3.0%) and forearm (-2.5%) fractures. In the hypothetical scenario, treatment initiations and total screenings increased almost tenfold versus the current scenario, at an estimated direct incremental cost of 27.83€ per woman per year in the cohort. DISCUSSION: Our study adds to the existing evidence on the impact of screening to prevent fractures amongst post-menopausal women. Despite being based on a stochastic model, our study confirms findings most recently published in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: Our study models the positive public health impact of increasing SLTC levels amongst post-menopausal women with a prior osteoporotic fracture.
Authors: Emma Söreskog; Oskar Ström; Anna Spångéus; Kristina E Åkesson; Fredrik Borgström; Jonas Banefelt; Emese Toth; Cesar Libanati; Mata Charokopou Journal: Bone Date: 2020-02-15 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: O Johnell; J A Kanis; A Odén; I Sernbo; I Redlund-Johnell; C Petterson; C De Laet; B Jönsson Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-10-30 Impact factor: 4.507
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: E Hernlund; A Svedbom; M Ivergård; J Compston; C Cooper; J Stenmark; E V McCloskey; B Jönsson; J A Kanis Journal: Arch Osteoporos Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: Alessandro de Sire; Marco Invernizzi; Alessio Baricich; Lorenzo Lippi; Antonio Ammendolia; Federico Alberto Grassi; Massimiliano Leigheb Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2021-07-18