Higher rates of osteoporosis treatment initiation and persistence in patients with newly diagnosed vertebral fracture when introduced in inpatients than later in outpatients

A Hip New Standard: Improving Osteoporosis Care with Inpatient Administration of IV Zoledronate

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis continues to be underdiagnosed and inadequately treated in older hip-fracture patients. Our aim was to improve the rate of osteoporosis treatment with IV bisphosphonate therapy in eligible patients admitted for hip-fracture surgery.

METHODS

The present study was designed as a quality improvement initiative using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles at an academic medical center in Portland, Oregon, over 2.5 years. A protocol was developed (1) to administer IV zoledronate on postoperative day 2 to inpatients aged ≥50 years who underwent surgery for a low-energy hip fracture and (2) to formally diagnose osteoporosis during admission. The protocol was introduced across 3 care settings in a stepped-wedge manner. Outcome measures were the percentage of inpatient zoledronate administered to eligible patients and formal documented diagnosis of osteoporosis. Balance measures included fever after administration and hospital length of stay (LOS). Measures were assessed through quarterly chart review and tracked via control charts.

RESULTS

The rate of zoledronate administration significantly increased from 34.5% (29 of 84) to 74.6% (53 of 71) following the second PDSA cycle (p < 0.001). Documented osteoporosis diagnosis also significantly improved from 51.0% (53 of 104) to 85.7% (96 of 112) following the second PDSA cycle (p < 0.001). No significant differences were shown for hospital LOS, and 1 of 82 patients had medical work-up for post-infusion acute phase reaction after administration.

CONCLUSIONS

This initiative was effective at improving osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment among older hip-fracture patients at our institution. Protocol development for administrating inpatient zoledronate after hip fracture is a reliable way to predictably offer bone health care and secondary-fracture prevention to hip-fracture patients and can be adapted and implemented at other institutions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Fractured FRAX: Nurses' role in reckoning with racism in international osteoporosis fracture risk calculations

AIM

This paper will examine racism's role in calculating fracture risk via the use of race- and ethnicity-based calculations and offer guidance for nurses to mitigate the risk of further exacerbating race-based inequities in fracture care.

BACKGROUND

Using race adjustments in fracture risk calculation, such as in the FRAX, reflects the history of systemic racism in nursing and medicine, particularly in screening for and treating osteoporosis. Osteoporosis-related fractures, which result in increased costs, disability, and death, are a public health problem.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

The critique examines genetic and sociohistorical evidence to illuminate the fallacy that race has biological underpinnings and outline the implications of using race in fracture risk assessment.

DISCUSSION

Race-based risk calculation, including assessing fracture risk, is one of the mechanisms by which the medical and healthcare sectors perpetuate systemic racism.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE AND POLICY

Nurses are called to action to address the contributing role of race-based algorithms, such as the FRAX, to unequal treatment. Nurses should advocate for the removal of race in these clinical decision-making tools and case studies. Additionally, nurses should advocate for their replacement with better tools that do not use race but rather measures of structural racism to calculate risk. Policy guidance should be issued so that race, a sociohistorical tool of categorization to preserve power structures, should no longer be used as an approximation of other more relevant and precise risk factors for fractures or other diseases.

CONCLUSION

Nurses are critical in cultivating and implementing antiracist approaches to remediate health inequities in screening and treatment of osteoporosis and other preventable diseases.

Osteoporotic Fractures of the Thoracic and Lumbar Vertebrae: Diagnosis and Conservative Treatment

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of osteoporotic vertebral body fractures in Europe is 18-26%. Although most of these injuries can be treated conservatively, the underlying concepts have not been defined clearly or uniformly. In this article, we present the current state of the evidence on the diagnosis and conservative treatment of osteoporotic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature up to May 2020 was carried out in the PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection databases. 549 articles were identified, of which 36 were suitable for inclusion in the review. Articles were sought in the areas of diagnosis, provision of physical aids, pharmacotherapy, physiotherapy, and treatments from the realm of alternative medicine.

RESULTS

The primary diagnostic technique was conventional x-ray in two planes (with the patient standing, if possible), which had 51.3% sensitivity and 75% specificity. If a fracture was suspected, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the entire spine and regional computed tomography (CT) were carried out. The overall state of the evidence on treatment is poor; the best available evidence is for exercise therapy and physiotherapy, which are supported by three level I and four level II studies. Improvements were seen mainly in mobility and a reduced fear of falling. The use of an active orthosis can be useful as well. No evidence was found on the use of drugs or alternative medicine exclusively in the conservative treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body fractures.

CONCLUSION

It is reasonable to evaluate instability with imaging repeatedly, at regular intervals, over a period of six months. There is still a lack of reliable data on the optimal intensity and duration of physiotherapy, and on the use of orthoses.

A patient-level key performance indicator set to measure the effectiveness of fracture liaison services and guide quality improvement: a position paper of the IOF Capture the Fracture Working Group, National Osteoporosis Foundation and Fragility Fracture Network

The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) Capture the Fracture® Campaign with the Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) and National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) has developed eleven patient-level key performance indicators (KPIs) for fracture liaison services (FLSs) to guide quality improvement.

INTRODUCTION

Fracture Liaison Services (FLSs) are recommended worldwide to reduce fracture risk after a sentinel fracture. Given not every FLS is automatically effective, the IOF Capture the Fracture working group has developed and implemented the Best Practice Framework to assess the organisational components of an FLS. We have now developed a complimentary KPI set that extends this assessment of performance to the patient level.

METHODS

The Capture the Fracture working group in collaboration with the Fragility Fracture Network Secondary Fragility Fracture Special Interest Group and National Osteoporosis Foundation adapted existing metrics from the UK-based Fracture Liaison Service Database Audit to develop a patient-level KPI set for FLSs.

RESULTS

Eleven KPIs were selected. The proportion of patients: with non-spinal fractures; with spine fractures (detected clinically and radiologically); assessed for fracture risk within 12 weeks of sentinel fracture; having DXA assessment within 12 weeks of sentinel fracture; having falls risk assessment; recommended anti-osteoporosis medication; commenced of strength and balance exercise intervention within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; monitored within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; started anti-osteoporosis medication within 16 weeks of sentinel fracture; prescribed anti-osteoporosis medication 52 weeks after sentinel fracture. The final KPI measures data completeness for each of the other KPIs. For these indicators, levels of achievement were set at the < 50%, 50-80% and > 80% levels except for treatment recommendation where a level of 50% was used.

CONCLUSION

This KPI set compliments the existing Best Practice Framework to support FLSs to examine their own performance using patient-level data. By using this KPI set for local quality improvement cycles, FLSs will be able to efficiently realise the full potential of secondary fracture prevention and improved clinical outcomes for their local populations.

Management of hospitalised osteoporotic vertebral fractures

Management of hospitalised osteoporotic vertebral fracture patients was explored across all major trauma orthopaedic hospitals in Ireland. Findings, based on a survey of orthopaedic doctors and physiotherapists, indicate a lack of standardised clinical care pathways. This study will inform development of clinical audit mechanisms and health service development for this large and growing fracture population in both Ireland and internationally.

PURPOSE

To explore the management of hospitalised vertebral fragility fracture (VFF) patients in Ireland.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of orthopaedic doctors (specialist registrar level) and physiotherapists was conducted across all hospitals with major orthopaedic trauma units in Ireland. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics in SPSS (V24).

RESULTS

Responses were achieved from 100% (n = 16) of the hospitals (42 individual physiotherapists and 47 orthopaedic doctors). Conservative management was usual with both orthopaedic doctors (n = 37, 79%) and physiotherapists (n = 40, 96%) reporting prescription of bracing as common practice despite a lack of underpinning evidence. A majority (87%) of the doctors believed osteoporosis medications should commence prior to discharge from the acute setting, but 68% did not agree that responsibility for coordination and delivery of bone health assessment and fracture risk management rested with them. A majority (72%) of physiotherapists reported an absence or were unsure regarding existence of fracture liaison services. 73% of physiotherapists reported prescribing an inpatient or home (78%) exercise programme, including mobility, strength and balance exercise though detail on dose and adherence remain unknown. Wide variance in referral patterns to multi-disciplinary team (MDT) members existed although 79% of orthopaedic doctors supported an MDT approach.

CONCLUSION

Clinical care pathways for the hospitalised VFF population lack standardisation in Ireland. Key challenges reported by orthopaedic doctors and physiotherapists relate to pain management, osteoporosis medication prescription, clarity on indications for bracing and a lack of fracture liaison services. Clinical guidelines, defined clinical care pathways and high-quality clinical research trials are required for VFF management.

A national study on long-term osteoporosis therapy and risk of recurrent fractures in patients with hip fracture

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of osteoporosis (OP) medication persistence on subsequent fractures and all-cause mortality in patients with hip fracture.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 40 years with fragility hip fracture from the Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. OP medication persistence was categorized as yes (≥ 12 months) or no (< 12 months). A multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the association between OP medication persistence and recurrent fractures (including hip, vertebral, and upper and lower limb fractures) and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 946 patients were included in the study (86.5 % of them aged ≥ 65 years) and 210 patients persistently received OP medications. Persistent OP medication use was associated with lower fracture risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.64; 95 % CI = 0.41-0.99; P = .043) in the follow-up period. The strongest predictors for all-cause mortality were age ≥ 80 years (HR = 5.68, 95 % CI = 1.36-23.64, P = .017), male sex (HR = 1.55; 95 % CI = 1.18-2.03; P = .002), and Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3 (aHR = 1.56; 95 % CI = 1.07-2.27; P = .022). Kaplan-Meier curves showed a lower cumulative incidence of recurrent fractures in the persistent group than that in the non-persistent group (P = .028).

CONCLUSION

Persistent OP medication use was associated with a lower risk of recurrent fractures but not with mortality in patients with hip fracture.

VIRTUAL ORTHOPEDIC-REHABILITATION-METABOLIC COLLABORATION FOR TREATING OSTEOPOROTIC HIP FRACTURES

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a virtual, closed-loop protocol that treated hip fracture patients without formal clinic visits. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, an intervention group of 85 hip fracture patients (33.6%) with vitamin D levels ≥65 nmol/L who received recommendations for osteoporosis treatment, was compared to a nonintervention group of 168 (66.4%), with vitamin D <65 nmol/L. Treatment included vitamin D loading in orthopedic and rehabilitation departments for patients from both groups, and virtual, osteoporosis treatment recommendations by Metabolic Clinic physicians to patients from the intervention group upon achieving a vitamin D level ≥65 nmol/L. Recommendations were given without requiring clinic visits. Osteoporosis drug recommendations were relayed to primary care physicians. The primary endpoint was patients receiving osteoporosis drugs within 12-months post-surgery. Secondary endpoints were patients issued drugs within 3- and 6-months post-surgery, and 1-year post-fracture mortality rates. Results: Among 253 hip fracture patients (81.3 ± 10.7 years-of-age, 68.8% women), the postintervention osteoporosis medication issue rate was higher than in the nonintervention group (48.2% versus 22.0%, respectively; P<.001). More intervention group patients received drugs 3 months (18.8% versus 2.9%; P<.001) and 6 months after surgery (40% versus 5.9%; P<.001). One-year mortality was lower among patients who received any osteoporosis medications (either through our intervention or from community physicians) than among untreated patients (5.1% versus 26.3%; P<.001). Conclusion: Virtual orthopedic-rehabilitation-metabolic collaboration increased osteoporosis treatment rates post-hip fracture. Yet, treatment rates remained <50%. Additional research is required to increase treatment rates further, such as providing drug therapy shortly after surgery, perhaps during rehabilitation, or lowering the vita-min D threshold. Abbreviations: CHS = Clalit Health Services; FLS = Fracture liaison service; HMO = Health Maintenance Organization; MMC = Meir Medical Center; PCP = primary care physician.