Patient perceptions of osteoporosis management: a qualitative pilot study by a patient advisory group

The management of osteoporosis even after a fracture is declining. Our pilot study in patients with osteoporosis confirms a large ignorance of the disease and major fears and uncertainties about the treatments. Complete and sustained medical information seems essential to counteract the contradictory information, which are exclusively negative.

PURPOSE

The management of osteoporosis (OP) even after a fracture has declined over recent years despite the actions of the medical societies concerned with this disease. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate patients' perceptions of OP, their treatment pathways, and how information is obtained.

METHODS

The Association Française de Lutte Anti-Rhumatismale (AFLAR) constituted an advisory group of 7 French patients (mean age 63.7 years [54-74 years]), with various stages of OP and duration of disease. A qualitative, anonymized study was conducted with an open-ended semi-structured questionnaire, with a contribution of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the "Groupe de Recherche et Informations sur les Ostéoporoses" (GRIO).

RESULTS

The onset of OP was often sudden, with the fracture occurring in a context of deep misunderstanding of OP by both the public and physicians. The patients have confidence in the physician, mostly a rheumatologist, who informs about OP and initiates the treatment. The main cause of non-adherence being major fears and uncertainties about efficacy and safety of treatments. Medical information is considered as insufficient, or poorly understood. Negative information has the highest impact, even if the sources seem unreliable, such as media. There is no trust in pharmaceutical companies and the ethics of physicians are in question.

CONCLUSION

This IOF/GRIO/AFLAR Patient Advisory Group pilot study illustrates the numerous barriers to effective OP management. Complete and sustained medical information, especially at the time of diagnosis and initiation of treatment, seems essential to counteract the contradictory information, which are exclusively negative.

A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending Fracture Liaison Services

Shared decision-making (SDM) aims to improve patients' experiences with care, treatment adherence, and health outcomes. However, the effectiveness of SDM in patients with a recent fracture who require anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a multicomponent adherence intervention (MCAI) including a patient decision aid (PDA) and motivational interviewing at Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) on multiple outcomes compared with usual care (UC). This pre-post superiority study included patients with a recent fracture attending FLS and with AOM treatment indication. The primary outcome was 1-year AOM persistence measured by pharmacy records. Secondary outcomes included treatment initiation, AOM adherence (measured by medication possession ratio [MPR]), decision quality (SDM process; 0-100, best), and decisional conflict (0-100, highest conflict), subsequent fractures, and mortality. Outcomes were tested in MCAI and UC groups at the first FLS visit and 4 and 12 months afterwards. Multiple imputation and uni- and multivariable analyses were performed. Post hoc analyses assessed the role of health literacy level. In total, 245 patients (MCAI: n = 136, UC: n = 109) were included. AOM persistence was 80.4% in the MCAI and 76.7% in the UC group (p=.626). SDM process scores were significantly better in MCAI (60.4 vs 55.1; p = .003). AOM initiation (97.8% vs 97.5%), MPR (90.9% vs 88.3%, p=.582), and decisional conflict (21.7 vs 23.0; p = .314) did not differ between groups. Results did not change importantly after adjustment. Stratified analyses by health literacy showed a better effect on MPR and SDM in those with adequate health literacy. This study showed no significant effect on AOM persistence; however, it demonstrated a significant positive effect of MCAI on SDM process in FLS attendees. (Netherlands Trial Registry, Trial NL7236 [NTR7435]; version 1.0; 26-11-2020 https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/nl/trial/22858).

Explaining declining hip fracture rates in Norway: a population-based modelling study

Background

Although age-standardised hip fracture incidence has declined in many countries during recent decades, the number of fractures is forecast to increase as the population ages. Understanding the drivers behind this decline is essential to inform policy for targeted preventive measures. We aimed to quantify how much of this decline could be explained by temporal trends in major risk factors and osteoporosis treatment.

Methods

We developed a new modelling approach, Hip-IMPACT, based on the validated IMPACT coronary heart disease models. The model applied sex- and age stratified hip fracture numbers and prevalence of pharmacologic treatments and risk/preventive factors in 1999 and 2019, and best available evidence for independent relative risks of hip fracture associated with each treatment and risk/preventive factor.

Findings

Hip-IMPACT explained 91% (2500/2756) of the declining hip fracture rates during 1999-2019. Two-thirds of the total decline was attributed to changes in risk/preventive factors and one-fifth to osteoporosis medication. Increased prevalence of total hip replacements explained 474/2756 (17%), increased body mass index 698/2756 (25%), and increased physical activity 434/2756 (16%). Reduced smoking explained 293/2756 (11%), and reduced benzodiazepine use explained (366/2756) 13%. Increased uptake of alendronate, zoledronic acid, and denosumab explained 307/2756 (11%), 104/2756 (4%) and 161/2756 (6%), respectively. The explained decline was partially offset by increased prevalence of type 2 diabetes and users of glucocorticoids, z-drugs, and opioids.

Interpretation

Two-thirds of the decline in hip fractures from 1999 to 2019 was attributed to reductions in major risk factors and approximately one-fifth to osteoporosis medication.

Funding

The Research Council of Norway.

Current situation of shared decision making in osteoporosis: A comprehensive literature review of patient decision aids and decision drivers

Background and Aims

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microstructural deterioration of bone tissues, resulting in bone fragility and increased fracture risk. It is the most common bone-related disease in the population. However, the proportion of patients who start treatment but discontinue it during the first year is very high (around 50%). Endeavors are made to promote patient participation in treatment by implementing patient decision aids (PDA), whose function is to help the patient make disease-related decisions. We aim to summarize the characteristics of the currently available PDA for osteoporosis, as well as deciding factors.

Methods

Comprehensive review of the literature.

Results

Currently, eleven PDAs can be found for osteoporosis. These PDA have different characteristics or options such as information about treatments tailored to patient needs, graphic information of the results (to facilitate understanding), personal histories (learning), tests to check the knowledge acquired, provision of evidence, clinical practice guidelines or a final summary to share with their doctor. Only five of these PDAs can be considered complete since they provide relevant disease information and therapeutic options to the patient, promote patient's reflection and foment patient-physician discussion.

Conclusions

This study provides an update on the current state of decision making on osteoporosis and available PDA, which can help engage the patient through shared decision-making by considering, among other things, patient preferences. Physicians should consider PDA, as it may promote adherence and effectiveness of treatment.

The Economic Burden of Severe Osteoporotic Fractures in the French Healthcare Database: The FRACTOS Study

Osteoporosis carries a high medical, economic, and societal burden principally because of the risk of severe fractures. The objective of this cost-of-illness study was to describe health resource utilization and associated costs in all patients aged ≥50 years hospitalized for a severe osteoporotic fracture over a 6-year period (2009 to 2014) in France. Data were extracted from the French national healthcare database (SNDS) on all health care resource utilization between the index date (date of hospitalization for first fracture during the enrollment period) and study end (December 31, 2016) or until the patient died. Costing was restricted to direct costs and determined from the payer perspective. Variables related to costs were identified through multivariate logistic regression analysis. A total of 356,895 patients were included (median follow-up 39.1 months). In the year after the index fracture, 36,622 patients (10.5%) were rehospitalized for a fracture-related reason. Only 18,474 (5.3%) underwent bone densitometry and 58,220 (16.7%) received a specific treatment. The total annual per capita osteoporosis-related cost in the year after the index severe osteoporotic fracture was €18,040 (from €8598 for multiple ribs to €21,085 for hip fracture) of which €17,905 was incurred by fracture-related costs. The cost incurred by management of osteoporosis was €135. Over years 2 to 5, the mean annual per capita costs of fracture treatment (€806, mostly attributable to the treatment of refractures) continued to dominate those of osteoporosis management (€99). Total annual cost of care was €1260 million (year 2014). Variables associated with higher cost were older age, male sex, site of fracture, a history of prior osteoporotic fracture, and the number of refracture events. The 5-year cost of severe osteoporotic fractures to the French health care system is high and mostly attributable to the treatment of refractures. Improved fracture prevention measures in patients with osteoporosis is crucial to reduce the economic burden of the disease. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Comparison of Denosumab and Zoledronic Acid in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis: Bone Mineral Density (BMD) and Trabecular Bone Score (TBS)

BACKGROUND

Denosumab (DEN) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) currently represent the most potent antiresorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis. Despite similar effects on bone resorption, these agents have distinct mechanisms of action. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of DEN and ZOL after two-year administration on bone mineral density (BMD), trabecular bone score (TBS), bone turnover markers, and persistence.

METHODS

A total of 585 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who did not use osteoporosis medications were retrospectively reviewed. 290 patients were administered 60 mg DEN subcutaneously every 6 months from 2017 to 2018, and 295 patients were treated with 5 mg ZOL intravenously yearly from 2015 to 2017. BMD, TBS, and C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX) measurements were obtained at baseline and two-year after DEN injection or ZOL infusion.

RESULTS

After two-year follow-up, 188 patients in the DEN group and 183 patients in the ZOL group were compared. BMD change from baseline at two years was significantly greater in the DEN group compared with the ZOL group (P < 0.001). The changes of TBS in the DEN group were statistically significant compared with baseline (P < 0.001) and the ZOL group (P < 0.001). The DEN group led to significantly greater reduction of CTX compared with ZOL group (P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, DEN was associated with greater BMD increase at all measured skeletal sites, greater increase of TBS, and greater inhibition of bone remodeling compared with ZOL.

Barriers and Expectations for Patients in Post-Osteoporotic Fracture Care in France: The EFFEL Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to quantify the relative importance of barriers to better secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures and of care expectations expressed by patients with osteoporotic fractures in France.

METHODS

A qualitative exploration of potential barriers to care and expectations was undertaken through a systematic literature review and in-depth patients interviews. A list of 21 barriers and 21 expectations was identified. These were presented to 324 subjects with osteoporotic fractures, identified in a representative sample of the French population, in the form of best-worst scaling questionnaires. Patients rated the relative importance of the attributes, and arithmetic mean importance scores were calculated and ranked. A Bayesian hierarchical model was also performed to generate a relative importance score. Latent class analysis was performed to identify potential subgroups of patients with different response profiles.

RESULTS

A total of 7 barriers were rated as the most important, relating to awareness of osteoporosis and coordination of care. The highest-ranked barrier, "my fracture is not related to osteoporosis," was significantly more important than all the others (mean importance score 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.56). A similar ranking of attributes was obtained with both the arithmetic and the Bayesian approach. For expectations, no clear hierarchy of attributes was identified. Latent class analysis discriminated 3 classes of respondents with significant differences in response profiles (the educated environmentalists, the unaware, and the victims of the system).

CONCLUSIONS

Better quality of care of osteoporosis and effective secondary fracture prevention will require improvements in patient education, training of healthcare professionals, and coordination of care.

The role of patient preferences in adherence to treatment in chronic disease: a narrative review

Adherence to prescribed medication is important to the management of all diseases, especially those of chronic nature. Drug effectiveness is substantially compromised by therapy nonadherence. We reviewed the available evidences on the impact of patient preferences for therapy on adherence to a prescribed treatment in chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment. A search on PubMed retrieved 699 publications, leading to a selection of 12 publications: 6 on osteoporosis, 2 on moderate-to-severe asthma, 1 on type 1 diabetes, 1 on type 2 diabetes, 1 on kidney transplantation, and 1 on atrial fibrillation. Overall, 8 studies found a positive association between patient preference and adherence to therapy, while the others found no association. In general, overall adherence was considered to be high in the published studies. The reasons for a positive association included reduced dosing frequency, route of administration, lower costs, and favorable safety profile, which is related to the diverse nature of the pathology and its type and duration of treatment. A literature review suggests that achieving good adherence and persistence to therapy requires evaluation of patient preferences. In a period of increasingly limited resources, more effort is warranted to promote better adherence to therapy, especially when patients must self-manage their disease in the long term. Our results further highlight that insufficient attention has been given to the relationship between patient preference and adherence and point out the complex nature of adherence and the need for adequate patient education. More efforts are also needed to better understand the entity of cost savings for payers for specific treatments and the link with patient preference.

Pharmacological interventions versus placebo, no treatment or usual care for osteoporosis in people with chronic kidney disease stages 3-5D

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for osteoporosis and is more prevalent among people with CKD than among people who do not have CKD. Although several drugs have been used to effectively treat osteoporosis in the general population, it is unclear whether they are also effective and safe for people with CKD, who have altered systemic mineral and bone metabolism.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 3-5, and those undergoing dialysis (5D).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any anti-osteoporotic drugs with a placebo, no treatment or usual care in patients with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality using the risk of bias tool, and extracted data. The main outcomes were the incidence of fracture at any sites; mean change in the bone mineral density (BMD; measured using dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry (DXA)) of the femoral neck, total hip, lumbar spine, and distal radius; death from all causes; incidence of adverse events; and quality of life (QoL). Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies involving 9164 randomised participants with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D met the inclusion criteria; all participants were postmenopausal women. Five studies included patients with CKD stages 3-4, and two studies included patients with CKD stages 5 or 5D. Five pharmacological interventions were identified (abaloparatide, alendronate, denosumab, raloxifene, and teriparatide). All studies were judged to be at an overall high risk of bias. Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.69; low certainty evidence). Anti-osteoporotic drugs probably makes little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.05; moderate certainty evidence) and adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence). We were unable to incorporate studies into the meta-analyses for BMD at the femoral neck, lumbar spine and total hip as they only reported the percentage change in the BMD in the intervention group. Among patients with severe CKD stages 5 or 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low (MD 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.02). Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine (MD 0.03, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.04, low certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in the included studies. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of death (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.56; very low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture in low certainty evidence. Anti-osteoporotic drugs make little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture and adverse events in moderate certainty evidence. Among patients with CKD stages 5 and 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture and death because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine in low certainty evidence. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Larger studies including men, paediatric patients or individuals with unstable CKD-mineral and bone disorder are required to assess the effect of each anti-osteoporotic drug at each stage of CKD.

Persistence and adherence to parenteral osteoporosis therapies: a systematic review

Osteoporosis is a chronic disease of low bone mass and fragility. Treatment is frequently compromised by suboptimal medication compliance causing increased morbidity. This review investigates adherence and persistence to parenteral osteoporosis therapies. Findings reveal parenteral medications requiring reduced dosing frequency have higher compliance than oral therapies. This systematic review examines real-world adherence to parenteral osteoporosis therapies. We searched PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases for English language observational studies that examined patient adherence and/or persistence to parenteral osteoporosis treatments (teriparatide sc, ibandronate iv, zoledronic acid iv, and denosumab sc) in adults with osteoporosis published up to September 2018. Studies with only self-reported adherence or persistence data and those with less than 20 patients were excluded. Quality assessment of included studies was completed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS). We identified 40 eligible studies. Teriparatide was examined in 29 studies, with persistence rates of 10-87% (median 55%) at 1 year and 10-69% (median 29.5%) at 2 years, and adherence rates of 21-89% (median 53%) at 1 year and 37-68% (median 40%) at 2 years. Ten studies of zoledronic acid reported persistence rates of 34-73% (median 42%) for second dose and 20-54% (median 35.8%) for third dose. Ten studies of ibandronate adherence reported and 2-year persistence rates of 31-58% (median 47.5%) in 1 year and 13-35% (median 25%) at 2 years, and adherence rates of 21-72% (median 47.3%) and 15-58% (median 36.5%) respectively. Denosumab was reported in 19 studies, with second (1 year) and fourth (2 year) dose persistence rates of 61-100% (median 81%) and 36-99% (median 45.5%). There is substantial heterogeneity in reports of persistence and adherence rates with parenteral osteoporosis therapies. Most of the published data are from short-term studies and evaluations of long-term adherence and persistence with parenteral therapies for osteoporosis are needed.

Pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in people with chronic kidney disease stages 3‐5D

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

This review aims to assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 3‐5D.

Adherence and preference of intravenous zoledronic acid for osteoporosis versus other bisphosphonates

Objective

To evaluate adherence as well as patient preference and satisfaction of once-yearly intravenous zoledronic acid versus other bisphosphonates treatments.

Methods

In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases, over the date range of 2000-2016. Following the PICO (Population, Interventions, Comparator, Outcomes) elements, eligibility criteria included: (1) participants: adults over 18 with osteoporosis and adults who were at high risk of developing low bone density as a result of chronic use of glucocorticoids; (2) intervention: adherence or patient preference/satisfaction of once-yearly zoledronic acid treatment; (3) comparator: other bisphosphonates; (4) outcome: data about adherence, persistence, compliance, preference and satisfaction criteria. Specific exclusion criteria were also applied.

Results

Adherence to zoledronate is only quantified in one study showing that mean proportion of days covered for zoledronic acid was greater than for ibandronate users. Three studies showed 100% of compliance to zoledronate treatment and only one study showed zoledronic acid provided the highest persistence rates. Once-yearly intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid was clearly preferred. Only one article indicated preference for schedules that were once monthly or less frequent and other preference results practically equal between once-yearly intravenous infusion or weekly oral. Although there is little evidence, adherence to osteoporosis treatment is improved with annual intravenous zoledronate regimen. Moreover, patients appear to have preference for less frequent dosing. Switching from oral to intravenous therapy, based on the opportunities offered by an integrated health management area, may allow obtaining better outcomes in adherence to osteoporosis treatment.