Osteoporosis practice patterns in 2006 among primary care physicians participating in the NORA study

Patterns of Osteoporosis Medications Selection after Drug Holiday or Continued Therapy: A Real-World Experience

PURPOSE

Published literature on physicians' preferences and sequential treatment (Rx) patterns of osteoporosis therapy is scarce.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients who received at least 3 consecutive years of bisphosphonates, denosumab, and/or raloxifene, or at least 18 months of teriparatide for osteoporosis. Data gathering spanned 10 years from October 2007 until September 2016 at a tertiary care center in USA.

RESULTS

12,885 patients were identified based on receiving at least one Rx at any point in time, 1,814 patients were randomly reviewed, and 274 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 68.8 ± 10.7 years and females represented 90.9%. Primary care physicians constituted 65.7% and rheumatologists 22.6% of the prescribers. Prior to instituting a drug holiday, alendronate was the most common initial Rx (Percentage, mean duration ± standard deviation in years): 69.0%, 5.4±2.4y followed by ibandronate (9.5%, 4.9±2.1y) and raloxifene (9.1%, 5.2±1.6y). Denosumab was the most common second course of Rx accounting for 29.3% of the total of 82 patients who were subsequently prescribed another therapy, followed by alendronate (24.4%) and zoledronate (20.7%). Among patients who were placed on a drug holiday and eventually restarted on an osteoporosis therapy, denosumab was the most common treatment instituted (n=21) accounting for 40% of the total, followed by alendronate (32%) and zoledronate (16%). There was a progressive decline of osteoporosis therapy over the duration of the study.

CONCLUSION

Alendronate was the most common initial therapy. Denosumab was the most common second course of treatment prescribed.

General practitioner gender and use of diagnostic procedures: a French cross-sectional study in training practices

OBJECTIVES

The acceleration in the number of female doctors has led to questions about differences in how men and women practice medicine. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of general practitioner (GP) gender on the use of the three main categories of diagnostic procedures-clinical examinations, laboratory tests and imaging investigations.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional nationwide multicentre study.

SETTING

French training general practices.

PARTICIPANTS

The patient sample included all the voluntary patients over a cumulative period of 5 days per office between November 2011 and April 2012. The GP sample included 85 males and 43 females.

METHODS

54 interns in general practice, observing their GP supervisors, collected data about the characteristics of GPs and consultations, as well as the health problems managed during the visit and the processes of care associated with them. Using hierarchical multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression models, we performed multivariable analyses to assess differences in each of the three main categories of diagnostic procedures, and two specific multivariable analyses for each category, distinguishing screening from diagnostic or follow-up procedures. We searched for interactions between GP gender and patient gender or type of health problem managed.

RESULTS

This analysis of 45 582 health problems managed in 20 613 consultations showed that female GPs performed more clinical examinations than male GPs, both for screening (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.58) and for diagnostic or follow-up purposes (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.84). Female GPs also ordered laboratory tests for diagnostic or follow-up purposes more frequently (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.43). Female GPs performed even more clinical examinations than male GPs to diagnose or follow-up injuries (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.40).

CONCLUSION

Further research on the appropriateness of diagnostic procedures is required to determine to what extent these differences are related to underuse or overuse.

Practice of Family Physicians in the Management of Osteoporosis Among Older Female Patients at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Background Osteoporosis is one of the major worldwide health concerns and carries medical, social, and financial impacts due to its significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to explore the practice of family physicians in osteoporosis management in older female patients. Method This study was performed in a cross-sectional manner. Data, including patient and disease characteristics and management practices, were obtained from the electronic patient chart for female patients aged 60 years and older who were followed in family medicine clinics at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, during the period from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020. Management was checked and evaluated against osteoporosis management guidelines. Results In 42 patients out of 250, an osteoporosis diagnosis was missed. Among the 208 charts that were reviewed, the mean patient age was 72.06 years, and the mean duration of the disease according to the initial dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan was 3.68 years. Laboratory tests were performed for only about half of the patients. Vitamin D was given only to 54.3% while calcium supplements were given only to 53.4%. Almost one-third of the patients have not been prescribed any antiosteoporosis medications. Conclusion The current study documented that older females with osteoporosis were not well-managed in the investigated family medicine settings. Continuous professional development activities and periodic practice reviews are suggested to improve this situation.

Use of Bone Turnover Markers in Clinical Practice for the Management of Osteoporosis in Korea: From the Survey on the Prescription Pattern of Bone Turnover Markers

Background

There has been interest in the clinical potential of bone turnover markers (BTMs) as tools both for assessing fracture risk and for monitoring treatment. However, the practical use of BTMs has been limited by their biological variability and difficulties in the interpretation of results. We investigated the current situation of application of BTMs by clinicians in Korea for the management of osteoporosis through a survey asking the patterns of BTMs prescription in clinical practice.

Methods

The survey was conducted online using the “google survey” by the BTM committee authorized by the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Results

Total 108 clinicians responded the survey. Most of the respondents prescribed BTMs (80.6%) when they prescribed anti-osteoporotic medications (AOMs). The most frequently prescribed bone resorption and formation markers were serum C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (90.7%) and osteocalcin (65.1%), respectively. BTMs were mostly prescribed before starting AOMs (90.8%) and used for the purpose of evaluating treatment response (74.4%). Treatment response and compliance to AOMs were evaluated according to the change of absolute value of BTMs (55.1%). The respondents complained difficulties in the interpretation of BTMs (33.3%), the choice of proper BTMs (17.2%), and the proper sample preparation and handling (13.8%).

Conclusions

In Korea, most of clinicians recognized the benefit of BTMs in the management of osteoporosis. However, there are limitations in the broad use of these markers in clinical practice. Therefore, a clear recommendation for BTM in Korea enhances their use in clinical practice.

Reasons for Not Treating Women with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis with Prescription Medications: Physicians' and Patients' Perspectives

BACKGROUND

In the United States, between one-third and two thirds of postmenopausal women do not begin treatment with a prescription osteoporosis medication after a diagnosis of osteoporosis. The objective of this study was to understand the reasons for this lack of treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Online physician and patient surveys were administered in 2013. The physician survey included a chart review of untreated postmenopausal women recently diagnosed with osteoporosis and gathered data on physicians' practices regarding the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. The patient survey was given to untreated postmenopausal women with a recent osteoporosis diagnosis.

RESULTS

The physician survey was completed by 224 physicians, who also reviewed 811 patient charts. A total of 165 patients completed the patient survey. In the chart review, physicians reported that 19% of the postmenopausal women they diagnosed with osteoporosis were not prescribed an osteoporosis medication. The patient declined a physician's recommendation for pharmacological treatment in 81% and 52% of cases in the physician and patient surveys, respectively. The most frequent reasons for physicians not recommending treatment were: low calcium and/or vitamin D levels, patients potentially at risk of medication side effects, pre-existing gastrointestinal problems, and polypharmacy. The most frequent reasons for patients deciding against treatment were: concerns about side effects, considering nonprescription options and behavioral modifications, and questioning the potential benefit of taking the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients decided against pharmacological treatment of newly diagnosed osteoporosis in at least half of the cases of nontreatment. The principal reasons for not being treated with a prescription medication, given by both physicians and patients, were that there were alternatives and concern about the risks of prescription medications.

Expert Consensus on the Management of Patients with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in the Spanish Healthcare System

INTRODUCTION

The management of postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) in routine clinical practice differs considerably from guideline recommendations. The objective of our study was to reach a consensus on the management of PMO, considering prevention, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up, according to expert opinion in Spain.

METHODS

A two-round Delphi technique was conducted, including 38 experts. The questionnaire contained 35 sections, each one including 1-10 questions (n = 308) based on a literature review and contributions from the scientific steering committee. Each question was scored by experts from the current (1 = no occurrence, 9 = occurrence in all cases), wish (1 = total rejection; 9 = wish) and prediction (1 = no occurrence at all; 9 = occurs with maximum probability) perspectives. Consensus (wish and prediction perspectives) was considered when ≥75% of experts scored 7-9 (agreement) or 1-3 (disagreement).

RESULTS

Overall, consensus was achieved on 75% of questions. While protocols of clinical management and consultation/referral should be followed, their implementation is unlikely. Furthermore, the medical specialties currently involved in PMO management are poorly defined. PMO patients without fracture should be managed (prevention, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up) in both primary care and rheumatology settings; however, experts predicted that only treatment and follow-up will be assumed by these specialties. A multidisciplinary team should be involved in patients with fracture. No assessment tools are usually applied, and prediction indicated that they will not be used.

CONCLUSION

Efforts should be focused on questions with high divergence between wishes and predictions, defining actions that will improve PMO management. Collaboration between scientific societies and health authorities to address the identified opportunities of improvement is proposed.

FUNDING

Amgen S.A.

Physicians' perspectives on the treatment of osteoporosis patients with bisphosphonates

BACKGROUND

Noncompliance with bisphosphonate therapy among osteoporosis patients attenuates the reduction of fracture risk. The objective of this study was to assess physicians' prescribing considerations, preferences for osteoporosis treatments, and perceptions of patients' compliance with oral bisphosphonates.

METHODS

This was an online survey of US physicians identified in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database (HIRD(SM)) as prescribing oral bisphosphonates to women aged ≥55 years. The survey gauged physicians' prescribing considerations and preferences for various types of osteoporosis medications. The physicians were asked to predict patient persistence and compliance, and rate various reasons for noncompliance.

RESULTS

Bone mineral density, long-term medication use (eg, corticosteroids), and a history of fracture were ranked as major considerations by 94.9%, 88.6%, and 86.7% of participating physicians (N=158), respectively, when deciding whether to treat an osteoporosis patient. Most physicians expressed a preference for prescribing weekly or monthly oral bisphosphonates, for both newly diagnosed patients (54.4% and 34.2%, respectively) and long-term users of oral bisphosphonates (40.5% and 36.1%, respectively). Most physicians (23.4% always, 58.9% sometimes) incorporated a drug holiday into their prescribing patterns. Although most physicians predicted that more than half of the patients would comply with the prescribed medication for at least a year, 17.7% predicted that less than half of the patients would be compliant in the 1st year, and 29.7% predicted the same result for compliance beyond 1 year. In the opinion of the majority of physicians, the major reasons for noncompliance with oral bisphosphonates were intolerance of a medication due to a gastrointestinal condition (71.5%) and medication side effects (69.6%).

CONCLUSION

US physicians consider several relevant risk factors when deciding whether to prescribe pharmacotherapy and exhibit a preference for weekly or monthly regimens. The physicians estimated a substantial minority of the patients to be noncompliant with oral bisphosphonates, for reasons including primarily gastrointestinal intolerance and medication-related side effects.

Self-reported calcium use in a cohort of postmenopausal women receiving osteoporosis therapy: results from POSSIBLE US™

Calcium use was common and remained high among women on osteoporosis therapy. Use of calcium-supplemented pharmacologic therapy increased from 65.1 to 76.0% in these women (mean follow-up, 27.5 months). Over 12 months, calcium discontinuation was fairly similar among women using calcium only (23.7%) and women supplementing pharmacologic therapy with calcium (22.5%).

INTRODUCTION

Calcium has an important role in bone health. This study describes calcium use and persistence in a postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment cohort.

METHODS

Subject-reported calcium use was analyzed for 3,722 participants of the Prospective Observational Scientific Study Investigating Bone Loss Experience (POSSIBLE US(TM)) who used calcium either as their sole osteoporosis treatment (calcium only) or to supplement pharmacologic osteoporosis therapy (supplementers). Descriptive analyses were conducted. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the probability of discontinuing calcium therapy, and logistic regression was used to assess associations (age-adjusted odds ratios) between healthy behaviors and calcium use.

RESULTS

At entry, there were 711 calcium-only subjects and 1,960 of 3,011 subjects on pharmacologic osteoporosis therapy also supplementing with calcium (supplementers). The percentage of supplementers increased from 65.1 to 76.0% during follow-up (mean, 27.5 months). During the first 12 months on study, the probability of calcium discontinuation was 23.7% (95 % confidence interval [CI], 20.7 - 27.0) among calcium-only subjects and 22.5% (95% CI, 20.7-24.5) among supplementers. Supplementers who discontinued pharmacologic therapy were more likely to discontinue calcium than supplementers who continued pharmacologic therapy (34.9 versus 14.8%). Overall 54.2% of calcium-only subjects who discontinued calcium and 42.3% of supplementers who discontinued calcium resumed calcium use during follow-up. Regular exercise was positively correlated with calcium use at study entry.

CONCLUSIONS

Calcium supplementation in pharmacologically treated subjects increased over time. Persistence with calcium was high. Discontinuation of pharmacologic osteoporosis therapy was associated with an increased likelihood of discontinuing calcium use.

Perception, knowledge, and use by general practitioners of Belgium of a new WHO tool (FRAX) to assess the 10-year probability of fracture

The FRAX tool that calculates the 10-year probability of having a fracture has recently been validated for Belgium. Little is known about the perception and knowledge that GPs have about this tool in their daily practice. A survey has been conducted as part of a screening campaign for various diseases. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the perception and the knowledge of the FRAX tool by GPs. The secondary objective was to assess the impact of an information brochure about the FRAX tool on these outcomes. The survey was sent to a sample of 700 GPs after only half of them had received the information brochure. The survey results show that, out of the 193 doctors who responded to the survey, one-third know the FRAX tool but less than 20 % use it in their daily clinical practice. Among those who use it, the FRAX tool is largely seen as a complementary but not as an essential tool in the diagnosis or in the management of osteoporosis. It appears that the brochure could improve the knowledge of the FRAX tool but it would not be more efficient on its use in daily practice than the other sources of information. At present, the use of the FRAX tool in Belgium is limited but an information brochure could have a positive impact on the knowledge of the FRAX tool.

Predictors of bone mineral density testing in patients at high risk of osteoporosis: secondary analyses from the OSTEOPHARM randomized trial

In a randomized trial, we demonstrated that a community pharmacist osteoporosis screening intervention doubled the rates of bone mineral density (BMD) testing in high-risk patients. The purpose of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the potentially modifiable factors associated with BMD testing. From 2005 to 2007, 15 pharmacies randomized 262 patients to intervention (education, pamphlets, point-of-care quantitative heel ultrasound [QUS]) or usual care. The main outcome was BMD testing within 4mo. Multivariate regression was used to determine independent correlates of BMD testing. The median age of the cohort was 62yr, 65% were women, and 49% (n=129) were randomized to intervention. Compared with patients who were not tested, those with BMD were more likely to be women (p=0.007) and have excellent or very good health (p<0.001). Postrandomization correlates of BMD test were intervention (p=0.017), greater osteoporosis knowledge (p=0.004), and osteoporosis-specific physician visits (p<0.001). In adjusted analyses, only female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-7.4) and osteoporosis-specific visits (aOR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.4-7.8) were independently associated with BMD testing. In analyses restricted to intervention patients, abnormal QUS (aOR: 3.7, 95% CI: 1.4-9.1) was the only independent predictor of BMD test. Future interventions should incorporate the finding that osteoporosis-specific visits and abnormal QUS results were strongly associated with getting a BMD testing and should give greater attention to men.

Bone quality: educational tools for patients, physicians, and educators

BACKGROUND

Defining bone quality remains elusive. From a patient perspective bone quality can best be defined as an individual's likelihood of sustaining a fracture. Fracture risk indicators and performance measures can help clinicians better understand individual fracture risk. Educational resources such as the Web can help clinicians and patients better understand fracture risk, communicate effectively, and make decisions concerning diagnosis and treatment.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We examined four questions: What tools can be used to identify individuals at high risk for fracture? What clinical performance measures are available? What strategies can help ensure that patients at risk for fracture are identified? What are some authoritative Web sites for educating providers and patients about bone quality?

METHODS

Using Google, PUBMED, and trademark names, we reviewed the literature using the terms "bone quality" and "osteoporosis education." Web site legitimacy was evaluated using specific criteria. Educational Web sites were limited to English-language sites sponsored by nonprofit organizations

RESULTS

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool® (FRAX®) and the Fracture Risk Calculator (FRC) are reliable means of assessing fracture risk. Performance measures relating to bone health were developed by the AMA convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® and are included in the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative. In addition, quality measures have been developed by the Joint Commission. Strategies for identifying individuals at risk include designating responsibility for case finding and intervention, evaluating secondary causes of osteoporosis, educating patients and providers, performing cost-effectiveness evaluation, and using information technology. An abundance of authoritative educational Web sites exists for providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective clinical indicators, performance measures, and educational tools to better understand and identify fracture risk are now available. The next challenge is to encourage broader use of these resources so that individuals at high risk for fracture will not just be identified but will also adhere to therapy.

Osteoporosis pharmacotherapy following bone densitometry: importance of patient beliefs and understanding of DXA results

SUMMARY

Persistence with osteoporosis therapy remains low and identification of factors associated with better persistence is essential in preventing osteoporosis and fractures. In this study, patient understanding of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results and beliefs in effects of treatment were associated with treatment initiation and persistence.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to examine patient understanding of their DXA results and evaluate factors associated with initiation of and persistence with prescribed medication in first-time users of anti-osteoporotic agents. Self-reported DXA results reflect patient understanding of diagnosis and may influence acceptance of osteoporosis therapy. To improve patient understanding of DXA results, we provided written information to patients and their referring general practitioner (GP), and evaluated factors associated with osteoporosis treatment initiation and 1-year persistence.

METHODS

Information on diagnosis was mailed to 1,000 consecutive patients and their GPs after DXA testing. One year after, a questionnaire was mailed to all patients to evaluate self-report of DXA results, drug initiation and 1-year persistence. Quadratic weighted kappa was used to estimate agreement between self-report and actual DXA results. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of understanding of diagnosis, and correlates of treatment initiation and persistence.

RESULTS

A total of 717 patients responded (72%). Overall, only 4% were unaware of DXA results. Agreement between self-reported and actual DXA results was very good (κ = 0.83); younger age and glucocorticoid use were associated with better understanding. Correctly reported DXA results was associated with treatment initiation (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.2-15.1, p = 0.02), and greater beliefs in drug treatment benefits were associated with treatment initiation (OR 1.4, 95%CI 1.1-1.9, p = 0.006) and persistence with therapy (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that written information provides over 80% of patients with a basic understanding of their DXA results. Communicating results in writing may improve patient understanding thereby also improve osteoporosis management and prevention.

Design of the POSSIBLE UStrade mark Study: postmenopausal women's compliance and persistence with osteoporosis medications

Failure to take prescribed medication is common. The POSSIBLE US study is evaluating the impact of physician and patient characteristics on patient-reported compliance and persistence with osteoporosis medications. We report our study design and the baseline characteristics of 4,994 postmenopausal women recruited from primary care physician offices in 33 states.

INTRODUCTION

The Prospective Observational Scientific Study Investigating Bone Loss Experience (POSSIBLE US) is a longitudinal cohort study of osteoporosis therapy in primary care.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2007, 134 physicians (in 33 states) enrolled postmenopausal women initiating, changing, or continuing osteoporosis medications. After completing a baseline questionnaire, participants will provide data semi-annually for up to 3 years through 2008. Physicians provide patient data at baseline and routine follow-up visits. Participants from 23 sites also signed a release regarding administrative claims data for economic analyses and validation of self-reported data.

BASELINE RESULTS

Four thousand nine hundred and ninety-four evaluable women were recruited from internal medicine (n = 1,784), family practice (n = 1,556), obstetrics/gynecology (n = 1,556), and from one rheumatology practice (n = 98). Mean participant age was 64.3 years (SD = 9.97); 89% were Caucasian; 59% had some college education. Sixty-three percent used a single osteoporosis agent, usually a bisphosphonate. For monotherapy patients, concordance between clinic- and patient-reported medication use was lowest for patients prescribed estrogen therapy (70%) or calcium/vitamin D (72%). Obstetrician/gynecologists enrolled younger women, who were more likely to use estrogen therapy than patients enrolled by other physicians. The 934 women (19%) prescribed only calcium/vitamin D were younger than women prescribed pharmacologic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

POSSIBLE US provides a unique foundation for evaluating longitudinal use of osteoporosis medications and related outcomes.

Safety of adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with breast cancer

The use of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) as adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-sensitive breast cancer is increasing, as these drugs are more effective than tamoxifen alone in improving disease-free survival in breast cancer patients-whether used in lieu of tamoxifen as upfront therapy or after tamoxifen treatment periods of 2 years or longer. AIs differ from tamoxifen in their mechanism of action, effectively suppressing estrogen levels in postmenopausal women to near-undetectable levels. AI-associated adverse events largely mimic menopausal symptoms, including hot flashes, losses in bone mineral density, gynecologic symptoms, and arthralgias. The AIs lack the infrequent but potentially serious adverse events associated with tamoxifen (eg, endometrial cancer, thromboembolic events, and stroke). Large randomized studies of AIs in the adjuvant setting have not demonstrated an adverse effect on lipids and cardiovascular health, but postmenopausal women receiving AIs are at risk for age-related changes in lipid parameters and an increased risk for cardiovascular events. To optimize the overall benefits of adjuvant endocrine therapy with an AI, patients should be monitored for bone loss and cardiovascular risk factors, and symptoms such as joint pain and vaginal dryness should be anticipated and managed proactively.