Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture
Summary The majority of patients do not receive anti-osteoporotic treatment following a major osteoporotic fracture, despite the guidelines and the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments. The fight against factors limiting the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis should become a p...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of osteoporosis 2017-12, Vol.12 (1), p.24-24, Article 24 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 24 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 24 |
| container_title | Archives of osteoporosis |
| container_volume | 12 |
| creator | Flais, J. Coiffier, G. Le Noach, J. Albert, J. D. Faccin, M. Perdriger, A. Thomazeau, H. Guggenbuhl, P. |
| description | Summary
The majority of patients do not receive anti-osteoporotic treatment following a major osteoporotic fracture, despite the guidelines and the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments. The fight against factors limiting the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis should become a priority to improve secondary prevention after an initial osteoporotic fracture.
Purpose
Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments, osteoporosis management is currently insufficient. The main objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of anti-osteoporotic treatments introduced after an initial prior major osteoporotic fracture during hospitalization for recurring fractures.
Methods
We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, bicentric study that included all patients aged over 50 years who were hospitalized or seen in consultation for major osteoporotic fracture.
Results
One hundred twenty-eight out of two hundred four (62.7%) patients had a past history of major osteoporotic fracture and therefore had an indication of treatment based on guidelines. Among these patients, only 43/128 (33.5%) had received anti-osteoporotic treatment as secondary prevention after the initial fracture. The main causes of non-prescription identified were the attending physicians’ ignorance of the indication of treatment (
n
= 30; 35.3%), ignorance of the fracture (
n
= 17; 20%), and comorbidities (
n
= 12; 14.1%). The failure to introduce treatment was associated with the presence of comorbidities with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥6 (OR = 0.34 [0.16–0.73],
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01508431v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1873721974</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-97d029b244f487fc87dfde6e1f608f120cd0ffaedd0db2b572938d68f52456c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9PxCAQxYnRuP77AF4MRz1UgbbAHo1R12QTL3omLAxuN22pQDV-e9lU15uHgQnzey_hDULnlFxTQsRNpJTXoiA0V5mPag8dUclZUda02t_1jM3QcYwbQjihNT9EMyZZJrg8QmrpP_EQ4EO30BvA3mEfE_jBBx-biFMAnTroE256POjU5DbizyatcQAzhrAddXrjw58uNQa7oE0aA5yiA6fbCGc_9wl6fbh_uVsUy-fHp7vbZWFKIVMxF5aw-YpVlaukcEYK6yxwoI4T6SgjxhLnNFhL7IqtasHmpbRcuppVNTe8PEFXk-9at2oITafDl_K6UYvbpdq-5Z8TWZX0g2b2cmKH4N9HiEl1TTTQtroHP0ZFpSgFo3NRZZROqMlxxABu502J2u5ATTvI9rnyDtRWc_FjP646sDvFb-gZYBMQ86h_g6A2fgx9jucf129zepMW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1873721974</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Flais, J. ; Coiffier, G. ; Le Noach, J. ; Albert, J. D. ; Faccin, M. ; Perdriger, A. ; Thomazeau, H. ; Guggenbuhl, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Flais, J. ; Coiffier, G. ; Le Noach, J. ; Albert, J. D. ; Faccin, M. ; Perdriger, A. ; Thomazeau, H. ; Guggenbuhl, P.</creatorcontrib><description>Summary
The majority of patients do not receive anti-osteoporotic treatment following a major osteoporotic fracture, despite the guidelines and the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments. The fight against factors limiting the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis should become a priority to improve secondary prevention after an initial osteoporotic fracture.
Purpose
Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments, osteoporosis management is currently insufficient. The main objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of anti-osteoporotic treatments introduced after an initial prior major osteoporotic fracture during hospitalization for recurring fractures.
Methods
We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, bicentric study that included all patients aged over 50 years who were hospitalized or seen in consultation for major osteoporotic fracture.
Results
One hundred twenty-eight out of two hundred four (62.7%) patients had a past history of major osteoporotic fracture and therefore had an indication of treatment based on guidelines. Among these patients, only 43/128 (33.5%) had received anti-osteoporotic treatment as secondary prevention after the initial fracture. The main causes of non-prescription identified were the attending physicians’ ignorance of the indication of treatment (
n
= 30; 35.3%), ignorance of the fracture (
n
= 17; 20%), and comorbidities (
n
= 12; 14.1%). The failure to introduce treatment was associated with the presence of comorbidities with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥6 (OR = 0.34 [0.16–0.73],
p
< 0.05), dementia (OR = 0.23 [0.08–0.72],
p
< 0.05), and past history of proximal femur fracture (OR = 0.20 [0.04–0.91],
p
< 0.05).
Conclusions
Two thirds of patients with a past history of major osteoporotic fracture presenting with a new fracture were not treated. The main reason for lack of treatment seems to stem from the incorrect assessment of the patient’s fracture risk. Although major osteoporotic fracture leads to an increased risk of mortality and requires treatment, the significance of patient comorbidities was an independent risk factor leading to non-treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1862-3522</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1862-3514</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28251468</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Springer London</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cancer ; Chemoprevention - methods ; Chemoprevention - standards ; Chemoprevention - statistics & numerical data ; Comorbidity ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Endocrinology ; Endocrinology and metabolism ; Female ; Food and Nutrition ; Hospitalization ; Human health and pathology ; Humans ; Life Sciences ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Original Article ; Orthopedics ; Osteoporosis - complications ; Osteoporosis - drug therapy ; Osteoporotic Fractures - etiology ; Osteoporotic Fractures - prevention & control ; Recurrence ; Risk Factors ; Secondary Prevention - methods ; Secondary Prevention - standards ; Secondary Prevention - statistics & numerical data ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Archives of osteoporosis, 2017-12, Vol.12 (1), p.24-24, Article 24</ispartof><rights>International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2017</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-97d029b244f487fc87dfde6e1f608f120cd0ffaedd0db2b572938d68f52456c63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-97d029b244f487fc87dfde6e1f608f120cd0ffaedd0db2b572938d68f52456c63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,778,782,883,27907,27908,41471,42540,51302</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28251468$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://univ-rennes.hal.science/hal-01508431$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Flais, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coiffier, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Noach, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, J. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faccin, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perdriger, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomazeau, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guggenbuhl, P.</creatorcontrib><title>Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture</title><title>Archives of osteoporosis</title><addtitle>Arch Osteoporos</addtitle><addtitle>Arch Osteoporos</addtitle><description>Summary
The majority of patients do not receive anti-osteoporotic treatment following a major osteoporotic fracture, despite the guidelines and the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments. The fight against factors limiting the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis should become a priority to improve secondary prevention after an initial osteoporotic fracture.
Purpose
Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments, osteoporosis management is currently insufficient. The main objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of anti-osteoporotic treatments introduced after an initial prior major osteoporotic fracture during hospitalization for recurring fractures.
Methods
We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, bicentric study that included all patients aged over 50 years who were hospitalized or seen in consultation for major osteoporotic fracture.
Results
One hundred twenty-eight out of two hundred four (62.7%) patients had a past history of major osteoporotic fracture and therefore had an indication of treatment based on guidelines. Among these patients, only 43/128 (33.5%) had received anti-osteoporotic treatment as secondary prevention after the initial fracture. The main causes of non-prescription identified were the attending physicians’ ignorance of the indication of treatment (
n
= 30; 35.3%), ignorance of the fracture (
n
= 17; 20%), and comorbidities (
n
= 12; 14.1%). The failure to introduce treatment was associated with the presence of comorbidities with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥6 (OR = 0.34 [0.16–0.73],
p
< 0.05), dementia (OR = 0.23 [0.08–0.72],
p
< 0.05), and past history of proximal femur fracture (OR = 0.20 [0.04–0.91],
p
< 0.05).
Conclusions
Two thirds of patients with a past history of major osteoporotic fracture presenting with a new fracture were not treated. The main reason for lack of treatment seems to stem from the incorrect assessment of the patient’s fracture risk. Although major osteoporotic fracture leads to an increased risk of mortality and requires treatment, the significance of patient comorbidities was an independent risk factor leading to non-treatment.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Chemoprevention - methods</subject><subject>Chemoprevention - standards</subject><subject>Chemoprevention - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Endocrinology</subject><subject>Endocrinology and metabolism</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Food and Nutrition</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Human health and pathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osteoporosis - complications</subject><subject>Osteoporosis - drug therapy</subject><subject>Osteoporotic Fractures - etiology</subject><subject>Osteoporotic Fractures - prevention & control</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Secondary Prevention - methods</subject><subject>Secondary Prevention - standards</subject><subject>Secondary Prevention - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1862-3522</issn><issn>1862-3514</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9PxCAQxYnRuP77AF4MRz1UgbbAHo1R12QTL3omLAxuN22pQDV-e9lU15uHgQnzey_hDULnlFxTQsRNpJTXoiA0V5mPag8dUclZUda02t_1jM3QcYwbQjihNT9EMyZZJrg8QmrpP_EQ4EO30BvA3mEfE_jBBx-biFMAnTroE256POjU5DbizyatcQAzhrAddXrjw58uNQa7oE0aA5yiA6fbCGc_9wl6fbh_uVsUy-fHp7vbZWFKIVMxF5aw-YpVlaukcEYK6yxwoI4T6SgjxhLnNFhL7IqtasHmpbRcuppVNTe8PEFXk-9at2oITafDl_K6UYvbpdq-5Z8TWZX0g2b2cmKH4N9HiEl1TTTQtroHP0ZFpSgFo3NRZZROqMlxxABu502J2u5ATTvI9rnyDtRWc_FjP646sDvFb-gZYBMQ86h_g6A2fgx9jucf129zepMW</recordid><startdate>20171201</startdate><enddate>20171201</enddate><creator>Flais, J.</creator><creator>Coiffier, G.</creator><creator>Le Noach, J.</creator><creator>Albert, J. D.</creator><creator>Faccin, M.</creator><creator>Perdriger, A.</creator><creator>Thomazeau, H.</creator><creator>Guggenbuhl, P.</creator><general>Springer London</general><general>Springer Verlag</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20171201</creationdate><title>Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture</title><author>Flais, J. ; Coiffier, G. ; Le Noach, J. ; Albert, J. D. ; Faccin, M. ; Perdriger, A. ; Thomazeau, H. ; Guggenbuhl, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-97d029b244f487fc87dfde6e1f608f120cd0ffaedd0db2b572938d68f52456c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Chemoprevention - methods</topic><topic>Chemoprevention - standards</topic><topic>Chemoprevention - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Endocrinology</topic><topic>Endocrinology and metabolism</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Food and Nutrition</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Human health and pathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osteoporosis - complications</topic><topic>Osteoporosis - drug therapy</topic><topic>Osteoporotic Fractures - etiology</topic><topic>Osteoporotic Fractures - prevention & control</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Secondary Prevention - methods</topic><topic>Secondary Prevention - standards</topic><topic>Secondary Prevention - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Flais, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coiffier, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Noach, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, J. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faccin, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perdriger, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomazeau, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guggenbuhl, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><jtitle>Archives of osteoporosis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Flais, J.</au><au>Coiffier, G.</au><au>Le Noach, J.</au><au>Albert, J. D.</au><au>Faccin, M.</au><au>Perdriger, A.</au><au>Thomazeau, H.</au><au>Guggenbuhl, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture</atitle><jtitle>Archives of osteoporosis</jtitle><stitle>Arch Osteoporos</stitle><addtitle>Arch Osteoporos</addtitle><date>2017-12-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>24</spage><epage>24</epage><pages>24-24</pages><artnum>24</artnum><issn>1862-3522</issn><eissn>1862-3514</eissn><abstract>Summary
The majority of patients do not receive anti-osteoporotic treatment following a major osteoporotic fracture, despite the guidelines and the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments. The fight against factors limiting the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis should become a priority to improve secondary prevention after an initial osteoporotic fracture.
Purpose
Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic treatments, osteoporosis management is currently insufficient. The main objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of anti-osteoporotic treatments introduced after an initial prior major osteoporotic fracture during hospitalization for recurring fractures.
Methods
We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, bicentric study that included all patients aged over 50 years who were hospitalized or seen in consultation for major osteoporotic fracture.
Results
One hundred twenty-eight out of two hundred four (62.7%) patients had a past history of major osteoporotic fracture and therefore had an indication of treatment based on guidelines. Among these patients, only 43/128 (33.5%) had received anti-osteoporotic treatment as secondary prevention after the initial fracture. The main causes of non-prescription identified were the attending physicians’ ignorance of the indication of treatment (
n
= 30; 35.3%), ignorance of the fracture (
n
= 17; 20%), and comorbidities (
n
= 12; 14.1%). The failure to introduce treatment was associated with the presence of comorbidities with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥6 (OR = 0.34 [0.16–0.73],
p
< 0.05), dementia (OR = 0.23 [0.08–0.72],
p
< 0.05), and past history of proximal femur fracture (OR = 0.20 [0.04–0.91],
p
< 0.05).
Conclusions
Two thirds of patients with a past history of major osteoporotic fracture presenting with a new fracture were not treated. The main reason for lack of treatment seems to stem from the incorrect assessment of the patient’s fracture risk. Although major osteoporotic fracture leads to an increased risk of mortality and requires treatment, the significance of patient comorbidities was an independent risk factor leading to non-treatment.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Springer London</pub><pmid>28251468</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1862-3522 |
| ispartof | Archives of osteoporosis, 2017-12, Vol.12 (1), p.24-24, Article 24 |
| issn | 1862-3522 1862-3514 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01508431v1 |
| source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
| subjects | Aged Cancer Chemoprevention - methods Chemoprevention - standards Chemoprevention - statistics & numerical data Comorbidity Cross-Sectional Studies Endocrinology Endocrinology and metabolism Female Food and Nutrition Hospitalization Human health and pathology Humans Life Sciences Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Original Article Orthopedics Osteoporosis - complications Osteoporosis - drug therapy Osteoporotic Fractures - etiology Osteoporotic Fractures - prevention & control Recurrence Risk Factors Secondary Prevention - methods Secondary Prevention - standards Secondary Prevention - statistics & numerical data Treatment Outcome |
| title | Low prevalence of osteoporosis treatment in patients with recurrent major osteoporotic fracture |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T15%3A49%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Low%20prevalence%20of%20osteoporosis%20treatment%20in%20patients%20with%20recurrent%20major%20osteoporotic%20fracture&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20osteoporosis&rft.au=Flais,%20J.&rft.date=2017-12-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=24&rft.epage=24&rft.pages=24-24&rft.artnum=24&rft.issn=1862-3522&rft.eissn=1862-3514&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11657-017-0317-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E1873721974%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1873721974&rft_id=info:pmid/28251468&rfr_iscdi=true |