Search

Summary: The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of our Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) over a period of 2 years. Osteoporosis medication was prescribed for 243 patients, and zoledronic acid was the main drug prescribed (60.2%). Introduction: A Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) was implemented at Lille University Hospital in 2016. The main purpose of this study was to assess the performance of the FLS using criteria proposed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF). Methods: The criteria used were patient identification, patient evaluation, post-fracture assessment timing, vertebral-fracture identification, blood and bone mineral density (BMD) testing, falls prevention, multifaceted health and lifestyle risk-factor assessment, and medication initiation and review. Results: Between January 2016 and January 2018, 736 patients (≥ 50 years old) with a recent history of fragility fracture (≤ 12 months) were identified. The identification rate for hip fractures was 74.2%. However, patient evaluation for all type of fractures was quite low (30.3%) since many patients failed to attend the FLS unit. The reasons for non-attendance were refusal, agreed but subsequently failed to attend, and still waiting to be seen. In all, 256 patients (76.6% female, mean (SD) age 74.3 (11.0) years) were seen at the FLS. Mean (SD) post-fracture assessment timing was 13.3 (9.3) weeks. Of the 139 patients seen for a non-vertebral fracture, 103 were assessed for vertebral fractures, and at least one new vertebral fracture was found in 45 of them (43.7%). Osteoporosis medication was prescribed for 243 (94.9%) patients. The main osteoporosis drug prescribed was zoledronic acid (60.2%). Conclusions: Secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures has improved since the implementation of the FLS. However, patient identification, patient evaluation, and post-fracture assessment timing still need to be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The original version of this article, published on 5 June 2019, an author's name was misspelled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Frailty fractures place a significant socioeconomic burden on the health care system. The Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (SIOT) is proceeding to fracture liaison service (FLS) model accreditation in several Italian Fracture Units (FUs), which provides a multidisciplinary approach for the management of the fragility fracture patient. Introduction: Osteoporosis and the resulting fragility fractures, particularly femoral fractures, place significant socioeconomic burdens on the health care system globally. In addition, there is a general lack of awareness of osteoporosis, resulting in underestimation of the associated risks and suboptimal treatment of the disease. The fracture liaison service (FLS) represents an exemplary model of post-fracture care that involves a multidisciplinary approach to the frail patient through the collaboration of multiple specialists. The purpose of this article is to highlight the path undertaken by the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (SIOT) for the purpose of certification of numerous FLS centers throughout Italy. Methods: SIOT is proceeding with international FLS accreditation in several Italian Fracture Units (FUs), following the creation of a model that provides specific operational and procedural steps for the management of fragility fractures throughout the country. FUs that decide to join the project and implement this model within their facility are then audited by an ACCREDIA-accredited medical certification body. Results: The drafted FLS model, thanks to the active involvement of a panel of experts appointed by SIOT, outlines a reference operational model that describes a fluid and articulated process that identifies the procedure of identification, description of diagnostic framing, and subsequent initiation of appropriate secondary prevention programs for fractures of individuals who have presented with a recent fragility fracture of the femur. Conclusion: Accreditation of this prevention model will enable many facilities to take advantage of this dedicated diagnostic-therapeutic pathway for the purpose of fracture prevention and reduction of associated health and social costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Osteoporosis is an underdiagnosed disease that results in bone fragility and risk of fractures. Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is a secondary prevention model which identifies patients at risk for fragility fractures. The introduction of a FLS protocol showed an increase of anti-osteoporotic drug prescription and significant reduction of all-cause mortality. Introduction : Hip fractures are the most severe osteoporotic fracture due to their associated disability and elevated risk of mortality. FLS programs have enhanced the management of osteoporosis-related fractures. Our objective is to analyze the effect of the FLS model over survival and 2-year mortality rate following a hip fracture. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study on patients over 60 years of age who suffered a hip fracture during 3 consecutive years, before and after the implementation of the FLS in our center (i.e., between January 2016 and December 2018). Patients' information was withdrawn from our local computerized database. Patients were followed for 2 years after the hip fracture. Mortality and re-fracture rates were compared between the two groups using a multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. Results: A total of 1101 patients were included in this study (i.e., 357 before FLS implementation and 744 after FLS implementation). Anti-osteoporotic drugs were more frequently prescribed after FLS implementation (583 (78.4%) vs 44 (12.3%); p < 0.01). There was an increase of adherence to treatment after FLS implementation (227 (38.9%) vs 12 (3.3%); p = 0.03). A total of 222 (29.8%) patients after FLS implementation and 114 (31.9%) individuals before FLS implementation (p = 0.44) died during the follow-up period. A second fracture occurred in 49 (6.6%) patients after FLS implementation and in 26 (7.3%) individuals before FLS implementation (p = 0.65). Patients who were treated with anti-osteoporotic drugs after the implementation of the FLS protocol had a lower all-cause 1-year and 2-year mortality compared with patients managed before the implementation of the FLS protocol (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59–0.96; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69–1.09, respectively). Conclusions: The implementation of a FLS protocol was associated with an increase of anti-osteoporotic treatment, higher adherence, and greater survival in elderly hip fracture patients. There was a significant reduction of all-cause mortality in the FLS patients treated with anti-osteoporotic. However, the application of the FLS did not affect the risk of suffering a second fragility fracture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: We assessed two electronic search tools that screen medical records for documented fractures. Both programs reliably identified patients with any fracture but missed individuals with minimal trauma fracture to different degrees. A hybrid tool combining the methodology of both tools is likely to improve the identification of those with osteoporosis. Purpose: Most patients who suffer a minimal trauma fracture remain undiagnosed, placing them at high risk of refracture. Case finding can be improved by electronic search tools that screen medical records for documented fractures. Here, we assessed the efficacy of two new programs, AES and XRAIT, in identifying patients with minimal trauma fracture. Methods: Each tool was applied to search the electronic medical record and/or radiology reports at two tertiary hospitals in Sydney, Australia, from 1 July to 31 December 2018. Samples of the extracted reports were then manually reviewed to determine the sensitivity of each program in detecting minimal trauma fractures. Results: At the two centers, AES detected 872 and 1364 cases, whereas XRAIT identified 1414 and 2180 patients with fractures, respectively. The true positive rate for "any fracture" was similar for both instruments (77–88%). However, the ability to detect "minimal trauma fractures" differed between programs and centers (53–75% accuracy), with each tool identifying separate subsets of patients. Concordance between both tools was less than half of the combined total number of minimal trauma fractures (43–45%). Considering the total number of minimal trauma fractures detected by both tools combined, AES correctly identified 52–55% of cases while XRAIT identified 88–93% of cases. Conclusion: Both programs reliably identified patients with any fracture but missed individuals with minimal trauma fracture to different degrees. Hybrid tools combining the methodology of XRAIT and AES are likely to improve the identification of patients who require investigation and treatment for osteoporosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for imaging of the lateral spine during DXA-measurement of the spine and hips may contribute to detect vertebral fractures. We advocate performing a VFA in all patients with a recent fracture visiting a fracture liaison service (FLS). Fracture liaison services (FLS) are important service models for delivering secondary fracture prevention for older adults presenting with a fragility fracture. While commonly age, clinical risk factors (including fracture site and number of prior fracture) and BMD play a crucial role in determining fracture risk and indications for treatment with antiosteoporosis medications, prevalent vertebral fractures usually remain undetected. However, vertebral fractures are important independent risk factors for future vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. A development of the DXA technology, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), allows for assessment of the lateral spine during the regular DXA bone mineral density measurement of the lumbar spine and hips. Recent approaches to the stratification of antiosteoporosis medication type according to baseline fracture risk, and differences by age in the indication for treatment by prior fracture mean that additional information from VFA may influence initiation and type of treatment. Furthermore, knowledge of baseline vertebral fractures allows reliable definition of incident vertebral fracture events during treatment, which may modify the approach to therapy. In this manuscript, we will discuss the epidemiology and clinical significance of vertebral fractures, the different methods of detecting vertebral fractures, and the rationale for, and implications of, use of VFA routinely in FLS. Summary points: • Vertebral fracture assessment is a tool available on modern DXA instruments and has proven ability to detect vertebral fractures, the majority of which occur without a fall and without the signs and symptoms of an acute fracture. • Most osteoporosis guidelines internationally suggest that treatment with antiosteoporosis medications should be considered for older individuals (e.g., 65 years +) with a recent low trauma fracture without the need for DXA. • Younger individuals postfracture may be risk-assessed on the basis of FRAX® probability including DXA and associated treatment thresholds. • Future fracture risk is markedly influenced by both site, number, severity, and recency of prior fracture; awareness of baseline vertebral fractures facilitates definition of true incident vertebral fracture events occurring during antiosteoporosis treatment. • Detection of previously clinically silent vertebral fractures, defining site of prior fracture, might alter treatment decisions in younger or older FLS patients, consistent with recent IOF-ESCEO guidance on baseline-risk-stratified therapy, and provides a reliable baseline from which to define new, potentially therapy-altering, vertebral fracture events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The prevalence of unknown vertebral fractures evaluated by systematic vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) was 21% in patients over 50 years of age who suffered from a recent low-trauma non-severe peripheral fracture. The outcome of VFA resulted in changes in the management of osteoporosis. Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of VFA in detecting vertebral fractures (VFs) in patients over 50 years of age, who suffered from a recent low-trauma non-severe peripheral fracture. Methods: This was an observational, single-center, cross-sectional study conducted in patients over 50 years of age, who presented a recent low-trauma non-severe peripheral fracture and were identified by the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) of Amiens University Hospital between December 2017 and March 2019. VFA was interpreted by two trained rheumatologists providing a consensual reading using Genant semi-quantitative assessment. Results: Of the 359 eligible patients, 114 patients (31.8%) were included (mean age 65.6 ± 8.4 years; 89.5% female). Twenty-four patients (21%) had one or more VF diagnosed by VFA. The total number of VF diagnosed by VFA was 30: 20 VF (66.7%) grade 1, 7 VF (23.3%) grade 2, and 3 VF (10%) grade 3. Among the 24 patients with at least one prevalent VF diagnosed by VFA, 18 patients had an osteoporosis medication adaptation after the VFA results (16 osteoporosis medication initiation and 2 treatment intensification), and 6 patients would have had an osteoporosis medication even without the VFA results (66.7% versus 33.3% respectively, p < 0.001). Of the 51 patients receiving an osteoporosis medication after DXA and VFA, 18 patients (35.3%) had a change in the management of osteoporosis after knowing the outcome of VFA. All the VFs diagnosed by VFA were unknown before. We did not evidence any threshold (age, T-score, height loss) below which no VF was detected. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the usefulness of systematic VFA to detect prevalent VF in patients over 50 years of age who suffer from a recent non-severe peripheral fracture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: We evaluated whether active osteoporosis care in patients experiencing their first distal radius fracture (DRF) reduces subsequent hip or spine fractures by comparing two cohorts. The incidence of subsequent fractures was significantly lower in the active care cohort than the other cohort in 4-year follow-up. Purpose: Studies show that osteoporosis care in patients with osteoporotic fracture reduces subsequent fractures, but the impact of such active care in patients with distal radius fracture (DRF) has not been well studied. We evaluated how much osteoporosis care in patients experiencing their first DRF can reduce subsequent hip or spine fractures at 4-year follow-up. Methods: Active osteoporosis care by orthopedic surgeons for patients with DRF started from September 2009 at our institution, thus we had a unique opportunity to compare the two cohorts: pre-involvement (PreI) group (DRF before September 2009) and post-involvement (PostI) group (DRF from September 2009). We compared the two cohorts for subsequent hip or spine fracture incidence in the 4 years following DRF. Results: Overall, 1057 patients with a DRF (85% women; mean age, 70 years) were studied, of whom 205 patients were in PreI group and 852 in PostI group. Subsequent fractures occurred in 27 patients (2.6%), with a mean interval of 29 months after DRF. The incidence was significantly lower in the PostI group than in the PreI group (1.9% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.004), especially in hip fractures (0.4% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.002). The relative risk reduction was 65% for all subsequent fractures and 86% for hip fractures. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that active osteoporosis care in patients with DRF significantly reduces subsequent fracture incidence even for the 4-year follow-up period. These findings add an evidence for the current proactive osteoporosis care programs such as fracture liaison services. Level of evidence: Therapeutic level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]