Bridging the osteoporosis quality chasm

KLF9 regulates osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells

Osteoporosis is a progressive skeletal disease which is characterized by reduced bone mass and degradation of bone microstructure. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have the potential to inhibit osteoporosis since they are multipotent stem cells that can differentiate into multiple types of cells including osteoblasts. Hence the mechanism of osteogenic differentiation of MSCs deserves comprehensive study. Here we report that KLF9 is a novel regulator in osteogenic differentiation of MSCs. We observed that depletion of KLF9 can largely compromise the osteogenic differentiation ability of MSCs. In addition, we revealed that inhibition of the PI3K-Akt pathway could also affect osteogenic differentiation since KLF9 depletion inhibits PI3K expression. Finally, we discovered that KLF9 expression can be induced by dexamethasone which is an essential component in osteogenic induction medium. Taken together, our study provides new insights into the regulatory role of KLF9 in osteogenic differentiation of MSCs.

Risk assessment tools for osteoporosis and fractures in 2022

Osteoporosis is one of the frequently encountered non-communicable diseases in the world today. Several hundred million people have osteoporosis, with many more at risk. The clinical feature is a fragility fracture (FF), which results in major reductions in the quality and quantity of life, coupled with a huge financial burden. In recognition of the growing importance, the World Health Organisation established a working group 30 years ago tasked with providing a comprehensive report to understand and assess the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely endorsed technology for assessing the risk of fracture or diagnosing osteoporosis before a fracture occurs, but others are available. In clinical practice, important distinctions are essential to optimise the use of risk assessments. Traditional tools lack specificity and were designed for populations to identify groups at higher risk using a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. Much has changed, though the purpose of risk assessment tools remains the same. In 2022, many tools are available to aid the identification of those most at risk, either likely to have osteoporosis or suffer the clinical consequence. Modern technology, enhanced imaging, proteomics, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data science will greatly advance a more personalised risk assessment into the future. Clinicians today need to understand not only which tool is most effective and efficient for use in their practice, but also which tool to use for which patient and for what purpose. A greater understanding of the process of risk assessment, deciding who should be screened, and how to assess fracture risk and prognosis in older men and women more comprehensively will greatly reduce the burden of osteoporosis for patients, society, and healthcare systems worldwide. In this paper, we review the current status of risk assessment, screening and best practice for osteoporosis, summarise areas of uncertainty, and make some suggestions for future developments, including a more personalised approach for individuals.

Gender Disparities in Osteoporosis Screening and Management Among Older Adults

INTRODUCTION

One in two women and one in four men experience an osteoporosis-related fracture in their lifetime. Related morbidity and mortality rates are higher in men versus women. Current guidelines are inconsistent in the screening recommendations for osteoporosis in men. Examination of gender disparities in the management of osteoporosis-related fractures among Medicare enrollees is currently lacking.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study using 5% National Medicare claims data from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2016, eligible patients who were at least 65 years of age on the date of a new fracture episode were classified into two mutually exclusive cohorts on the basis of whether they received testing and/or treatment for osteoporosis in the 6-month period after the new fracture episode. The cohorts were defined on the basis of the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) quality measure "osteoporosis management in women who had a fracture." Patients were followed to identify the occurrence of subsequent fracture, all-cause mortality, and a composite outcome-defined as the first occurrence of either subsequent fracture or mortality. Logistic regression models were carried out to identify predictors of testing and/or treatment and time-varying survival analysis to identify the relationship between the presence of testing and/or treatment and patient outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 35,774 eligible patients, only 10.2% (12.1% women and 5.7% men) received osteoporosis testing and/or treatment within 6 months after a fracture. The interaction between gender and fragility fracture was significant (P < 0.0001). Fragility fracture had greater adjusted odds of testing and/or treatment among men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.47; 95% CI 2.94-4.10) than women (AOR 1.65; 95% CI 1.53-1.79). Of patients who were eligible for the outcome assessment, 27.5% experienced a subsequent fracture, 23.2% died, and 44.3% experienced a composite outcome during follow-up. Patients who received testing and/or treatment had a significantly lower hazard of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.50-0.65; P < 0.0001) and the composite outcome (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.39-0.45; P < 0.0001), but no difference in the risk of subsequent fracture (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.94-1.11; P = 0.6083). Men were found to have a significantly lower hazard of subsequent fracture (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.64-0.73; P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.61-0.72; P < 0.0001), and the composite outcome (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.65-0.73; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Testing and/or treatment for osteoporosis among older adults with a fracture is poor in the Medicare fee-for-service population overall and worse for men compared to women. Receiving appropriate testing and/or treatment was associated with reduced mortality and the risk of composite outcome. Improving osteoporosis testing and/or treatment and reducing health disparities are essential for managing the clinical and economic burden of osteoporosis in the USA.

The Irish dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) Health Informatics Prediction (HIP) for Osteoporosis Project

PURPOSE

The purpose of the Irish dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) Health Informatics Prediction (HIP) for Osteoporosis Project is to create a large retrospective cohort of adults in Ireland to examine the validity of DXA diagnostic classification, risk assessment tools and management strategies for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures for our population.

PARTICIPANTS

The cohort includes 36 590 men and women aged 4-104 years who had a DXA scan between January 2000 and November 2018 at one of 3 centres in the West of Ireland.

FINDINGS TO DATE

36 590 patients had at least 1 DXA scan, 6868 (18.77%) had 2 scans and 3823 (10.45%) had 3 or more scans. There are 364 unique medical disorders, 186 unique medications and 46 DXA variables identified and available for analysis. The cohort includes 10 349 (28.3%) individuals who underwent a screening DXA scan without a clear fracture risk factor (other than age), and 9947 (27.2%) with prevalent fractures at 1 of 44 skeletal sites.

FUTURE PLANS

The Irish DXA HIP Project plans to assess current diagnostic classification and risk prediction algorithms for osteoporosis and fractures, identify the risk predictors for osteoporosis and develop novel, accurate and personalised risk prediction tools, by using the large multicentre longitudinal follow-up cohort. Furthermore, the dataset may be used to assess, and possibly support, multimorbidity management due to the large number of variables collected in this project.

Bone Mineral Density in Older U.S. Filipino, Chinese, Japanese, and White Women

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Bone mineral density (BMD) reference data exist for U.S. White, Black, and Hispanic (Mexican American) populations but not for U.S. Asians. Few studies have compared BMD findings among different U.S. Asian ethnicities.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Large northern California healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Asian and White women aged 50 to 79 years with BMD testing from 1998 to 2017 excluding those with estrogen or osteoporosis treatment, recent fracture, or select disorders affecting skeletal health.

MEASUREMENTS

Femoral neck (FN)-BMD and height data.

METHODS

Differences in FN-BMD were examined by ethnicity and age, comparing Filipino, Chinese, and Japanese women and non-Hispanic White women. Differences in BMD were also examined after adjustment for height.

RESULTS

There were 37,224 Asian women (including 11,147 Filipino, 10,648 Chinese, and 2,519 Japanese) and 115,318 non-Hispanic White women. Mean height was similar among the Asian subgroups and about 6 to 8 cm lower than Whites. Mean FN-BMDs differed by less than 3% for Filipino, Chinese, and Japanese and all were lower than Whites, with smaller Asian-White differences among younger women (<3%; ages 50-59) and larger differences among older women (6-8%; ages 65-79). Adjusting FN-BMD for height reduced White-Asian differences by about 30% to 40%.

CONCLUSION

Mean FN-BMD and height for Filipino, Chinese, and Japanese women were similar but consistently lower than White women, especially among older women. Although Asian-White BMD differences were substantially attenuated after height adjustment; some differences persisted for older women. Future studies should investigate potential age-cohort effects and the extent to which these BMD differences influence fracture risk and clinical care.

Repeating Measurement of Bone Mineral Density when Monitoring with Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry: 2019 ISCD Official Position

Bone mineral density (BMD) can be measured at multiple skeletal sites using various technologies to aid clinical decision-making in bone and mineral disorders. BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has a critical role in predicting risk of fracture, diagnosis of osteoporosis, and monitoring patients. In clinical practice, DXA remains the most available and best validated tool for monitoring patients. A quality baseline DXA scan is essential for comparison with all subsequent scans. Monitoring patients with serial measurements requires technical expertise and knowledge of the least significant change in order to determine when follow-up scans should be repeated. Prior ISCD Official Positions have clarified how and when repeat DXA is useful as well as the interpretation of results. The 2019 ISCD Official Positions considered new evidence and clarifies if and when BMD should be repeated. There is good evidence showing that repeat BMD measurement can identify people who experience bone loss, which is an independent predictor of fracture risk. There is good evidence showing that the reduction in spine and hip fractures with osteoporosis medication is proportional to the change in BMD with treatment. There is evidence that measuring BMD is useful following discontinuation of osteoporosis treatment. There is less documentation addressing the effectiveness of monitoring BMD to improve medication adherence, whether monitoring of BMD reduces the risk of fracture, or effectively discriminates patients who should and should not recommence treatment following an interruption of medication. Further research is needed in all of these areas.

Suboptimal osteoporosis evaluation and treatment in older men with and without additional high-risk factors for fractures

We compared osteoporosis case-finding, evaluation and treatment in groups of Older Men and Older Women with age alone as a significant risk for fracture and Older Men with Higher Risk (older men additionally having previous hip fracture, corticosteroid use or androgen deprivation therapy). We studied 13,704 older men and women (≥70 years old) receiving care at a Veterans Affairs medical center from January 2000 to August 2010 whose 10-year hip fracture risk was assessed by limited FRAX score. The main outcome measures were the proportion of patients who had bone mineral density (by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) and serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25-OH D) measurements performed, and calcium/vitamin D or bisphosphonates prescribed. The proportion of men with a 10-year hip fracture risk ≥3% with age alone as a risk was 48% and 88% in men aged 75-79 and ≥80 years, respectively. Compared with Older Women, fewer Older Men underwent DXA (12% vs 63%, respectively) and 25-OH D measurements (18% vs 39%), and fewer received calcium/vitamin D (20% vs 63%) and bisphosphonate (5% vs 44%) prescriptions. In Older Men with Higher Risk category, the proportion of men with 10-year hip fracture risk ≥3% ranged from 69% to 95%. Despite a higher risk and expectation that this group would have greater case detection and screening, few Older Men with Higher risk underwent DXA screening (27%-36%) and 25-OH D measurements (23%-28%), and received fewer calcium/vitamin D (40%-50%) and bisphosphonate (13%-24%) prescriptions. Considering the known morbidity and mortality, our findings underscore the need for improved evaluation and management of osteoporosis in older men at high risk for fracture.

The diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis impedes fracture prevention in women at high risk for fracture: A registry-based cohort study

The diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis, a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score ≤ -2.5, signals an increased risk for fracture. However, most fragility fractures arise among the majority of women with 'osteopenia' or 'normal' BMD. We hypothesized that a BMD T-score of -2.5, even if not intended as a treatment threshold, paradoxically may create disincentive to initiating treatment of women with osteopenia or normal BMD at high risk for fracture. From a population-based BMD registry covering the Province of Manitoba, Canada, we identified 3735 untreated women aged ≥ 50 years undergoing BMD screening in 2006-2015 found to qualify for Osteoporosis Canada guidelines-based treatment. The main outcome was prescription of an approved osteoporosis medications in the year after BMD testing ascertained from a population-based pharmacy database. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (OR, 95% confidence interval [CI]) for treatment initiation based on BMD, major fracture history (non-traumatic vertebral, hip or multiple fractures), age, and calendar year (to examine the impact of treatment guidelines published in 2010). Among these women, 50% (1853) initiated treatment: 71% with osteoporosis, 21% with osteopenia, and 5% with normal BMD with similar values in those with a prior major fracture (71%, 19%, 5%, respectively). Compared to women with osteoporosis, adjusted ORs for treatment of high risk women with osteopenia or normal BMD alone were 0.10 (95% CI 0.09-0.12) and 0.02 (95% CI 0.01-0.04), respectively, and no higher in women with a prior major fracture (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84-1.19) or following introduction of treatment guidelines (p = 0.294). In summary, we found evidence that the diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis may serve as a disincentive to initiation of treatment in many women at high risk for incident fracture.

Utility of DXA for monitoring, technical aspects of DXA BMD measurement and precision testing

Monitoring a patient's bone mineral density (BMD) is one of the main reasons for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) referral. It is widely recommended by clinical guidelines, and the accepted standard in practice for managing patients with osteoporosis and other disorders. Clinicians and DXA providers must be familiar with the scientific rationale and procedures involved in measurement science to obtain accurate and reproducible results. Their importance is critical to maximise the value of scan acquisition and interpretation. Scanning individual patients, with different needs and disorders, requires excellence in training, experience, and is more complex than just simply 'measuring BMD'. Over the past 3 decades many studies have validated the importance of monitoring BMD for fracture risk assessment, and for patients on osteoporosis treatment. New DXA features enhance the value of DXA monitoring today. Quality BMD measurement remains an essential component of patient care in osteoporosis and other disorders, playing a critical role in informed decision making for clinicians assessing and managing their patients. In this article we describe some of the technical aspects of measurement and discuss the utility of DXA for monitoring patients in clinical practice.

Blood Cadmium Is Associated with Osteoporosis in Obese Males but Not in Non-Obese Males: The Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2008-2011

Osteoporosis in males is becoming an important health concern in an aging society. The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between cadmium exposure and osteoporosis by considering the effect of obesity in aged males using a representative sample of the Korean population. Using the fourth and fifth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 1089 males over 50 years of age were analyzed. The blood cadmium concentration was measured. The bone mineral density in the total hip, femur neck, and lumbar spine was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. T-scores to determine the presence of osteoporosis were calculated using a Korean reference. Subjects were stratified into two groups according to obesity status (body mass index <25 kg/m² and ≥25 kg/m²). In comparison with obese subjects with blood cadmium <1.00 μg/L, those with blood cadmium >1.50 μg/L had odds ratios of 4.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49–14.01) and 5.71 (95% CI 1.99–16.38) at the femur neck and any site, respectively, after adjusting for potential confounders such as age, serum creatinine, vitamin D deficiency, smoking, alcohol drinking, and physical activity level. However, this association was not significant in non-obese males. In conclusion, the effect of cadmium on osteoporosis was different by obesity status in aged males.

Fracture incidence in a large cohort of men age 30 years and older with osteoporosis

In this large retrospective study of men with presumed osteoporosis, we estimate the rate of osteoporosis-related fractures in men age ≥30 years. Our results suggest that spine and hip fractures continue to be a considerable disease burden for osteoporotic men of all ages.

INTRODUCTION

The purposes of this study were to describe a cohort of men with presumed osteoporosis and estimate the incidence rates of fractures by age.

METHODS

Using US administrative claims data, we identified 43,813 men ≥30 years old with an osteoporosis diagnosis or use of an osteoporosis medication. Men were followed for a minimum of 12 months after diagnosis or treatment of osteoporosis (index date), until the earliest of fracture (hip, spine, pelvis, distal femur, humerus, wrist, forearm), disenrollment, or study end date.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 3834 first fractures following the index date and 3303 fractures in the 6-month period prior to the diagnosis/treatment of osteoporosis. Incidence rates of osteoporosis-related fracture, estimated from the index date onward, increased with age, although did not significantly differ from one another in younger age groups (30-49 and 50-64 years). Spine fractures had the highest incidence rate in men across all age groups, increasing from 10.8 per 100,000 person-years (p-yrs) (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.1, 12.7), 12.2 per 100,000 p-yrs (95% CI 11.2, 13.3), and 15.3 per 100,000 p-yrs (95% CI 13.8, 16.9) in men 30-49, 50-64, and 65-74 years to 33.4 per 100,000 p-yrs (95% CI 31.5, 35.4) in men ≥75 years. Hip fractures were the second most common, with the incidence rate reaching 16.2 per 100,000 (95% CI 14.9, 17.6) in the ≥75-year group.

CONCLUSION

These incidence rates suggest that spine and hip fractures are a considerable disease burden for men of all ages diagnosed and/or treated for osteoporosis.

Prevalence of osteoporosis in otherwise healthy Indian males aged 50 years and above

Bone mineral density was studied in 200 healthy Indian men above 50 years age, without fractures or osteoporosis. Mean vitamin D was 18.96 ng/ml; other biochemical evaluations were normal. Bone density (femur neck) decreased with age; there was osteoporosis in 8.5 %, osteopenia in 42 %, while 49.5 % were normal. Vitamin D deficiency may have caused osteoporosis.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis is recognized as the disease of females; however, males are also affected and have serious consequences thereof. The present study aimed at studying the prevalence of osteoporosis in otherwise healthy Indian males aged 50 years or more and studying the factors affecting bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

With informed consent, 200 healthy males aged 50 years or more without the history of fractures or diseases affecting the BMD were evaluated clinically (including anthropometry) and biochemically (serum calcium, phosphate, alkaline phosphatase, creatinine, albumin, 25-OH Vitamin D, intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH), and testosterone). The BMD was measured by single observer on Lunar DPX-NT at right proximal femur for least effects of artifacts. Calculation of T score and categorization as osteoporosis, osteopenia, and normal BMD was done as per WHO classification.

RESULTS

The mean age was 62.61 ± 7.64 years, and BMI was 23.90 ± 3.73 kg/m(2). The testosterone levels were normal in 84 % subjects. The mean 25-OH vitamin D level was 18.96 ± 10.23 ng/ml; only 13.5 % subjects had normal levels. The mean iPTH level was 72.60 ± 43.77 pg/ml; 57 % subjects had normal iPTH (12-72 pg/ml). The other parameters studied were normal. The osteoporosis and osteopenia were more prevalent when BMD was evaluated at neck of femur (osteoporosis 8.5 vs 8 % at trochanter and 7.5 % at total right hip; osteopenia 42 vs 37 % at trochanter and 41 % at total right hip). The BMD deteriorated with age.

CONCLUSION

The osteoporosis affects 8.5 % of otherwise healthy males aged 50 years and above. Vitamin D deficiency is common in such group and maybe responsible for osteoporosis.

Impact of a centralized osteoporosis coordinator on post-fracture osteoporosis management: a cluster randomized trial

We conducted a cluster randomized trial evaluating the effect of a centralized coordinator who identifies and follows up with fracture patients and their primary care physicians about osteoporosis. Compared with controls, intervention patients were five times more likely to receive BMD testing and two times more likely to receive appropriate management.

INTRODUCTION

To determine if a centralized coordinator who follows up with fracture patients and their primary care physicians by telephone and mail (intervention) will increase the proportion of patients who receive appropriate post-fracture osteoporosis management, compared to simple fall prevention advice (attention control).

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in small community hospitals in the province of Ontario, Canada. Hospitals that treated between 60 and 340 fracture patients per year were eligible. Patients 40 years and older presenting with a low trauma fracture were identified from Emergency Department records and enrolled in the trial. The primary outcome was 'appropriate' management, defined as a normal bone mineral density (BMD) test or taking osteoporosis medications.

RESULTS

Thirty-six hospitals were randomized to either intervention or control and 130 intervention and 137 control subjects completed the study. The mean age of participants was 65 ± 12 years and 69% were female. The intervention increased the proportion of patients who received appropriate management within 6 months of fracture; 45% in the intervention group compared with 26% in the control group (absolute difference of 19%; adjusted OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3-4.1). The proportion who had a BMD test scheduled or performed was much higher with 57% of intervention patients compared with 21% of controls (absolute difference of 36%; adjusted OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 3.0-7.0).

CONCLUSIONS

A centralized osteoporosis coordinator is effective in improving the quality of osteoporosis care in smaller communities that do not have on-site coordinators or direct access to osteoporosis specialists.

A T-2 translational research perspective on interventions to improve post-fracture osteoporosis care

The objectives of this paper are to: quickly outline the extent of the care gap in osteoporosis; define T-2 (knowledge) translation and its relationship to quality improvement; discuss the barriers to best practice in osteoporosis care after a fracture; convey the importance of rigor in design and evaluation of translational interventions by drawing upon examples from the broader literature; describe in some detail a series of post-fracture intervention trials conducted in Alberta, Canada; and make some conclusions specifically about osteoporosis interventions and more generally about T-2 translational research.

Secondary osteoporosis in men and women: clinical challenge of an unresolved issue

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and etiological factors of osteoporosis. We also tested the FRAX algorithm to compare the assessment of fracture risk in patients with primary or secondary osteoporosis.

METHODS

A prospective study carried out in a large sample of 123 men and 246 women. All subjects had a biochemical, densitometric, and radiological examination of thoracic and lumbar spine.

RESULTS

The prevalence of primary (men 52.9% vs women 50%; p = nonsignificant) and secondary (men 21.1% vs women 17.5%; p = nonsignificant) osteoporosis did not differ between the sexes. In contrast, the prevalence of primary osteoporosis was significantly higher than secondary causes (p < 0.0001) in both men and women. While women came to our attention for prevention of osteoporosis, men sought help because of clinical symptoms or disease-related complications, such as fractures. As evaluated by the FRAX tool, patients with osteopenia do not need treatment, in agreement with Italian guidelines. The estimated risk of major osteoporotic and hip fractures was significantly higher in women with secondary osteoporosis compared to men and also compared to women with primary osteoporosis.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of secondary osteoporosis in men is similar to that in women and it is less frequent than commonly reported. In patients with secondary osteoporosis, FRAX calculation may provide an estimate of a particularly high fracture risk in patients whose bone fragility is usually attributed to another disease.

The delivery of evidence-based preventive care for older Americans with arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Previous research suggests patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may receive suboptimal care with respect to preventive tests and services. We evaluated the proportion of older Americans with RA, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and osteoarthritis (OA) receiving these services and the specialty of the providers delivering this care.

METHODS

Using data from 1999 to 2006 from the Medicare Chronic Conditions Warehouse, we identified persons age >/= 65 in the national 5% sample. Over the required five-year observation period, we identified tests and services recommended for older adults and the associated healthcare provider. Services of interest included dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), influenza and pneumococcal vaccination, hyperlipidemia lab testing, mammography and colonoscopy.

RESULTS

After accounting for the sampling fraction, we identified 141,140 RA, 6,300 PsA, and 770,520 OA patients eligible for analysis. Over five years, a majority of RA, PsA, and OA patients were tested for hyperlipidemia (84%, 89% and 87% respectively) and received DXA (69%, 75%, and 52%). Only approximately one-third of arthritis patients received pneumococcal vaccination; 19% to 22% received influenza vaccination each year. Approximately 20% to 35% of arthritis patients never underwent mammography and colonoscopy over five years. Concomitant care from both a rheumatologist and a primary care physician was significantly associated with a greater likelihood of receiving almost all preventive tests and services.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older Americans on Medicare, the absolute proportion of persons with arthritis receiving various recommended preventive services and screening tests was substantially less than 100%. Improved co-management between primary care and arthritis physicians may in part improve the delivery of preventive care for arthritis patients, but novel systematic interventions in this area are needed.

The Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy: implementation of a population-based osteoporosis action plan in Canada

In the last decade, there have been a number of action plans published to highlight the importance of preventing osteoporosis and related fractures. In the province of Ontario Canada, the Ministry of Health provided funding for the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy. The goal is to reduce morbidity, mortality, and costs from osteoporosis and related fractures through an integrated and comprehensive approach aimed at health promotion and disease management. This paper describes the components of the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy and progress on implementation efforts as of March 2009. There are five main components: health promotion; bone mineral density testing, access, and quality; postfracture care; professional education; and research and evaluation. Responsibility for implementation of the initiatives within the components is shared across a number of professional and patient organizations and academic teaching hospitals with osteoporosis researchers. The lessons learned from each phase of the development, implementation, and evaluation of the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy provides a tremendous opportunity to inform other jurisdictions embarking on implementing similar large-scale bone health initiatives.

Missed opportunities for osteoporosis treatment in patients hospitalized for hip fracture

OBJECTIVES

Although osteoporosis treatment can dramatically reduce fracture risk, rates of treatment after hip fracture remain low. In-hospital initiation of recommended medications has improved outcomes in heart disease; hospitalization for hip fracture may represent a similar opportunity for improvement. The objective of this study was to examine rates of in-hospital treatment with a combination of calcium and vitamin D (Cal+D) and antiresorptive or bone-forming medications in patients hospitalized for hip fractures

DESIGN

Observational cohort.

SETTING

Three hundred eighteen hospitals in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-one thousand three hundred forty-six patients aged 65 and older hospitalized for osteoporotic hip fracture.

MEASUREMENTS

In-hospital administration of Cal+D and antiresorptive or bone-forming medications.

RESULTS

Three thousand four hundred five patients (6.6%) received Cal+D anytime after a procedure to correct femoral fracture; 3,763 patients (7.3%) received antiresorptive or bone-forming medications. Only 1,023 patients (2.0%) were prescribed ideal therapy, receiving Cal+D and an antiresorptive or bone-forming medication. Treatment rates remained low across virtually all patient-, provider-, and hospital-level characteristics. The strongest predictor of treatment with Cal+D was the receipt of an antiresorptive or bone-forming medication (adjusted odds ratio=5.50, 95% confidence interval=4.84-6.25), but only 27.2% of patients who received these medications also received Cal+D.

CONCLUSION

Rates of in-hospital initiation of osteoporosis treatment for patients with hip fracture are low and may represent an opportunity to improve care.

Is osteoporosis disease management cost effective?

Can osteoporosis disease management be cost effective? To answer that question, we conducted an extensive review of osteoporosis and fragility fracture prevention literature in peer-reviewed scientific journals and evidence-based guidelines from professional societies and government health organizations. We explored different strategies suggested by the literature to find how programs can be structured to be cost effective and to decrease fracture rates. We focused on ways to cost effectively identify, risk stratify, treat, and then track patients at risk for osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Studies have shown that osteoporosis management can decrease the hip fracture rate by 25% to 50% and be cost effective at the same time.

Update in male osteoporosis

CONTEXT

Osteoporosis in men is becoming an increasingly important public health problem. One in five men over the age of 50 yr will suffer an osteoporotic fracture during their lifetime, and men who sustain fractures have an increased mortality risk.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Evidence was obtained by PubMed search and author's knowledge of the field.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Studies using computed quantitative tomography and high-resolution peripheral computed quantitative tomography have provided new insights into the bone structural changes with aging in men, including the somewhat surprising demonstration of significant, ongoing trabecular bone loss starting in young adult life. In addition, there are now data demonstrating that serum estradiol levels are important predictors of fracture risk in men and that there is a threshold estradiol level below which not only bone loss but also fracture risk increases markedly. Criteria for diagnosing and managing osteoporosis in men are also evolving, including the application of the fracture risk assessment tool to derive 10-yr fracture risks in men. Three bisphosphonates (alendronate, risedronate, and zolendronic acid) and teriparatide are currently U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a number of new compounds, including a monoclonal antibody against receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand, selective estrogen receptor modulators, and selective androgen receptor modulators in varying stages of development.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant advances, there remain a number of key unresolved issues regarding the pathogenesis and management of male osteoporosis, not the least of which is increasing public awareness of this important cause of morbidity and mortality in men.