The impact of fracture liaison services on subsequent fractures and mortality: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that fracture liaison service (FLS) is associated with a significantly lower probability of subsequent fractures and mortality although the latter was only found in studies comparing outcomes before and after the introduction of an FLS.

INTRODUCTION

To systematically review and evaluate the impact of fracture liaison services (FLSs) on subsequent fractures and mortality using meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search was performed within PubMed and Embase to identify original articles published between January 1, 2010, and April 30, 2020, reporting the effect of FLSs on subsequent fractures and/or mortality. Only studies comparing FLS to no-FLS were included. A meta-analysis using random-effects models was conducted. The quality of studies was appraised after combining and modifying criteria of existing quality assessment tools.

RESULTS

The search retrieved 955 published studies, of which 16 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies compared outcomes before (pre-FLS) and after (post-FLS) FLS implementation, two studies compared outcomes between hospitals with and without FLS, and two other studies performed both comparisons. In total, 18 comparisons of FLS and no-FLS care were reported. Follow-up time varied from 6 months to 4 years. Sixteen comparisons reported on subsequent fractures and 12 on mortality. The quality assessment revealed methodological issues in several criteria. Excluding studies with very high selection bias, the meta-analysis of nine comparisons (in eight papers) revealed that the FLS care was associated with a significantly lower probability of subsequent fractures (odds ratio: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.52-0.93, P=0.01). In studies with a follow-up > 2 years, a significantly lower probability of subsequent fractures was captured for FLS care (odds ratio: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.34-0.94, P=0.03), while in studies ≤ 2 years, there was no difference in the odds of subsequent fractures. No significant difference in the odds of mortality was observed (odds ratio: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.49-1.09, P=0.12) in the meta-analysis of eight comparisons (in seven papers). However, a significantly lower probability of mortality was identified in the six pre-post FLS comparisons (odds ratio: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44-0.95, P=0.03), but not in studies comparing hospitals with and without FLS. No difference was observed in mortality stratified by follow-up time.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that FLS care is associated with a significantly lower probability of subsequent fractures and mortality although the latter was only found in studies comparing outcomes before and after the introduction of an FLS. The quality assessment revealed that some important methodological issues were unmet in the currently available studies. Recommendations to guide researchers to design high-quality studies for evaluation of FLS outcomes in the future were provided.

Cost-effectiveness analyses comparing cemented, cementless, hybrid and reverse hybrid fixation in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic overview and critical appraisal of the current evidence

Background: This study aims to present an overview and critical appraisal of all previous studies comparing costs and outcomes of the different modes of fixation in total hip arthroplasty (THA). A secondary aim is to provide conclusions regarding the most cost-effective mode of implant fixation per gender and age-specific population in THA, based on high quality studies.Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) comparing different modes of implant fixation in THA. Analysis of results was done with solely CEAs that had a high methodological quality.Results: A total of 12 relevant studies were identified and presented, of which 5 were considered to have the methodological rigor for inclusion in the analysis of results. These studies found that either cemented or hybrid fixation was the most cost-effective implant fixation mode for most age- and gender-specific subgroups.Conclusion: Currently available well performed CEAs generally support the use of cemented and hybrid fixation for all age-groups relevant for THA and both genders. However, these findings were mainly based on a single database and depended on assumptions made in the studies' methodology. Issues discussed in this paper have to be considered and future work is needed.

Hip protectors are cost-effective in the prevention of hip fractures in patients with high fracture risk

Cost-effective preventive interventions are necessary for tackling the increasing number of hip fractures, which are frequently occuring as a serious consequence of osteoporosis. Several interventions have been available for preventing and treating osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to systematically review and critically appraise studies that assessed cost-effectiveness of hip protectors for the prevention of hip fractures and to investigate the effects of age, gender and residence situation on cost-effectiveness. A systematic review was conducted in order to identify economic evaluation studies examining the hip protector solely or compared to no treatment according to the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Synthesis of results was performed to observe trends between the studies. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the use of the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. A total of 15 economic evaluation studies were included for analysis. The methodological quality was high in most studies (13/15). The hip protector was solely evaluated in three studies and within 12 other studies compared with no intervention. All studies that investigated the cost-effectiveness in long-term care facilities revealed that hip protector use is a cost-effective strategy for the prevention of hip fractures in elderly. Cost-effectiveness was also observed in two studies that provided hip protectors in a geriatric hospital ward. Four studies included both community-dwelling residents and residents living in a long-term care facility in their study. These studies showed more variability regarding cost-effectiveness. One study did not report information regarding the residence situation of their cohort, but also observed cost-effectiveness. In conclusion, this review suggests that hip protectors are a cost-effective approach in the prevention of hip fractures in populations with high risk of hip fractures especially in long-term care facilities and a geriatric ward in a hospital.