Osteoporosis treatment gap in a prospective cohort of volunteer women

Summary Despite the availability of efficient drugs to prevent osteoporotic fractures, only a minority of women receives osteoporosis therapy after a fracture. The high treatment gap in our cohort consisted of unselected volunteer patients highlights the urgent need of additional education, especial...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Osteoporosis international 2020-07, Vol.31 (7), p.1377-1382
Hauptverfasser: Iconaru, L., Smeys, C., Baleanu, F., Kinnard, V., Moreau, M., Cappelle, S., Surquin, M., Rubinstein, M., Rozenberg, S., Paesmans, M., Karmali, R., Bergmann, P., Body, J. J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary Despite the availability of efficient drugs to prevent osteoporotic fractures, only a minority of women receives osteoporosis therapy after a fracture. The high treatment gap in our cohort consisted of unselected volunteer patients highlights the urgent need of additional education, especially for the medical profession, regarding the risk-benefit balance of treatment. Introduction Despite the availability of efficient drugs to prevent osteoporotic fractures, only a minority of women receives osteoporosis therapy after a fracture, with a treatment gap around 80%. This can have dramatic consequences for patients and the healthcare systems. Methods In this study based on longitudinal data from the FRISBEE (Fracture RIsk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry) cohort of 3560 volunteer women aged 60 to 85 years, we evaluated the 1-year treatment gap after a first major incident fragility fracture. Results There were 386 first validated fragility fractures, 285 major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) and 101 “other major” fractures. The rate of untreated patients was 85.0% (82.8% for MOF versus 91.0 % for “other major” fracture sites) ( p  = 0.04), with a lower rate for spine (70.5%) and hip (72.5%) versus shoulder (91.6%) and wrist (94.1%) ( p  
ISSN:0937-941X
1433-2965
DOI:10.1007/s00198-020-05339-7