Search

Background: In Canada, more than 2 million people live with osteoporosis, a disease that increases the risk for fractures, which result in excess mortality and morbidity, decreased quality of life and loss of autonomy. This guideline update is intended to assist Canadian health care professionals in the delivery of care to optimize skeletal health and prevent fractures in postmenopausal females and in males aged 50 years and older. Methods: This guideline is an update of the 2010 Osteoporosis Canada clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and quality assurance as per Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) quality and reporting standards. Primary care physicians and patient partners were represented at all levels of the guideline committees and groups, and participated throughout the entire process to ensure relevance to target users. The process for managing competing interests was developed before and continued throughout the guideline development, informed by the Guideline International Network principles. We considered benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, resources, equity, acceptability and feasibility when developing recommendations; the strength of each recommendation was assigned according to the GRADE framework. Recommendations: The 25 recommendations and 10 good practice statements are grouped under the sections of exercise, nutrition, fracture risk assessment and treatment initiation, pharmacologic interventions, duration and sequence of therapy, and monitoring. The management of osteoporosis should be guided by the patient's risk of fracture, based on clinical assessment and using a validated fracture risk assessment tool. Exercise, nutrition and pharmacotherapy are key elements of the management strategy for fracture prevention and should be individualized. Interpretation: The aim of this guideline is to empower health care professionals and patients to have meaningful discussions on the importance of skeletal health and fracture risk throughout older adulthood. Identification and appropriate management of skeletal fragility can reduce fractures, and preserve mobility, autonomy and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Undertreatment of osteoporosis after hip or wrist fracture has been well documented, but the reasons for current patterns of care are poorly understood.Objective: We tested the role of physician and patient characteristics in predicting undertreatment when osteoporosis management was clearly indicated after a hip or wrist fracture in women over age 65.Methods: We assembled a cohort of 9,698 female Medicare beneficiaries aged > or = 65 years who experienced hip or wrist fracture between 2000 and 2004 and their prescribing physicians.Measurements: The dominant prescriber was identified as the physician prescribing at least 50% of patient prescriptions in the year after the fracture. Multivariate logistic regression estimated the role of physician and patient characteristics on osteoporosis management after hip or wrist fracture.Results: Patients older than 90 and black patients were less likely to be treated for osteoporosis relative to patients aged 65-69 and white patients. Female providers were more likely to manage osteoporosis. Models including patient characteristics discriminated well between managed and unmanaged patients (C statistic 0.81), while adding physician predictors to the model provided no additional discriminatory ability (C statistic 0.81).Conclusions: Our findings highlight that osteoporosis management rates are similar across providers, but vary considerably by patient types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little information is available on the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis pharmacotherapies. Objective: To compare the relative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments to reduce nonvertebral fracture risk among older adults. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Enrollees in 2 statewide pharmaceutical benefit programs for persons age 65 years or older. Patients: 43 135 new recipients of oral bisphosphonates, nasal calcitonin, and raloxifene who began treatment from 2000 to 2005. The mean age was 79 years (SD, 6.9), and 96% were women. Measurements: The primary outcome was nonvertebral fracture (hip, humerus, or radius or ulna) within 12 months of treatment initiation. Cox proportional hazard models stratified by state and adjusted for risk factors for fracture were used to compare fracture rates. Alendronate was the reference category in all analyses. Results: A total of 1051 nonvertebral fractures were observed within 12 months (2.62 fractures per 100 person-years). No large differences in fracture risk were found between risedronate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01 [95% CI, 0.85 to 1.21]) or raloxifene (HR, 1.18 [CI, 0.96 to 1.46]) and alendronate. However, among those with a fracture history, raloxifene recipients experienced more nonvertebral fractures within 12 months (HR, 1.78 [CI, 1.20 to 2.63]) compared with alendronate recipients. Patients who received calcitonin experienced more nonvertebral fractures than those who received alendronate (HR, 1.40, [CI, 1.20 to 1.63]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses that examined different lengths of follow-up (6 months and 24 months), were restricted to hip fracture as the outcome, and were completed in various subgroups. Limitation: Confounder adjustment was limited to health care utilization data, and the confidence bounds of some comparisons were too wide to rule out potential clinically important differences between agents. Conclusion: Differences in fracture risk between risedronate or raloxifene and alendronate were small. Nasal calcitonin recipients may have a higher risk for nonvertebral fractures compared with alendronate recipients. Future studies that can better adjust for possible confounding may further clarify these relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is ongoing controversy about who should be referred for bone mineral density (BMD) testing to estimate fracture risk and diagnose osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to examine patterns of use of BMD testing in Ontario between 1992 and 1998. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]