The fracture and osteoporosis clinic: 1-year results and 3-month compliance

Blonk, M. C.; Erdtsieck, Ronald J.; Wernekinck, Marian G.A.; Schoon, Erik J.

doi:10.1016/j.bone.2007.01.023

Cited by 42 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding patient compliance with regard to medication, we found high compliance in the osteoporotic and osteopenic groups, which has also been reported by others (Chevalley et al 2002, Blonk et al 2007, Kuo et al 2007). This might possibly be explained by neglecting to report one's own low compliance, but we interpret it as another indication of high patient motivation in general regarding the willingness of patients to seek treatment for osteoporosis.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…This may reflect the importance the patients themselves place on the results of bone density measurement: the more severe the condition, the stronger is the urge to seek medical help in receiving appropriate treatment. Other authors have also found a high degree of compliance in osteoporotic patients (Edwards et al 2005, Blonk et al 2007 We conclude that in the case of osteoporosis, patients themselves are capable of making adequate decisions about their health and their need for medical care. We acknowledge that the patients in our screening program were somewhat younger (50-75 years) than those who suffer the majority of fragility fractures, but we believe that identification of patients with a first fracture in this age group is crucial in order to prevent future fractures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3‐year follow‐up of 215 fracture patients from a prospective and consecutive osteoporosis screening program

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results 215 of the 236 patients answered the questionnaire, with a mean follow-up of 39 months. 76/87 of those with osteoporosis, 70/99 of those with osteopenia, and 11/29 of those with normal BMD had seen a doctor. Anti-resorptive treatment was prescribed to two-thirds of the osteoporotic patients, to one-sixth of the osteopenic patients, and to none of the patients with normal bone density. Calcium-vitamin D supplementation as monotherapy was given to one-third of the osteoporotic patients, to half of the osteopenic patients, and to half of the normal patients. Only a few osteoporotic patients, one-third of the osteopenic patients, and half of the normal patients received no treatment. Compli-

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

3‐year follow‐up of 215 fracture patients from a prospective and consecutive osteoporosis screening program

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, eligibility for investigation and treatment varied between studies. Despite including similar fracture populations, Langridge et al [29] offered BMD testing to patients only if it was thought the results would influence the patient's use of OP medication; Blonk et al [31] only advised drug therapy for those patients with OP on BMD; and Streeten et al [20] recommended a bisphosphonate to all patients unless contraindicated. In part, this heterogeneity was probably due to differences in guidelines across the 11 countries represented in this review regarding BMD T-scores and treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Although the EP likely underestimates the true rate because it assumes that those lost to follow-up were not investigated or treated, it provides us with a greater number of studies with comparable denominators. It has been shown that having a BMD test is associated with treatment initiation [24,[65][66][67][68][69][70], however, some of those interventions with very high investigation rates, such as Rozental et al [65] at 93% and Blonk et al [31] at 96%, reported relatively low proportions of fracture patients initiating antiresorptive medication (30% and 27%, respectively). According to Table 4, the interventions with higher EPs for investigation and treatment were those characterized as "BMD and/or treatment within".…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Systematic review on interventions to improve osteoporosis investigation and treatment in fragility fracture patients

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to determine osteoporosis (OP) investigation and treatment within post-fracture initiatives conducted in fracture clinics and other orthopedic environments. A systematic review was conducted. Eligibility criteria were: hip fracture patients plus all other fracture patients presenting with a fragility fracture, orthopedic setting where orthopedic physicians/staff were involved, intervention to improve OP management, primary data on ≥20 patients from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other study designs. We calculated outcome data within 6 months of screening from an intention-to-treat principle to derive an equated proportion (EP) across interventions. Outcomes were: (1) proportion of patients investigated with bone densitometry, (2) proportion of patients initiating OP medication, and (3) proportion of patients taking OP medication. We identified 2,259 citations, of which 57 articles that included 64 intervention groups were eligible. The median EP for patients investigated was 43% and the 75th percentile was 71%. The median EP for medication initiation was 22% and the 75th percentile was 34%. The median EP for medication taking was 27.5% and the 75th percentile was 43%. The EPs for all outcomes were higher for interventions with dedicated personnel to implement the intervention and those within which bone mineral density testing and/or treatment were included. In studies with an EP, up to 71% of patients were investigated for OP, but <35% initiated medication, and <45% were taking medication within 6 months of screening. Calculating an EP allowed us to compare outcomes across the studies, therefore capturing both RCTs and other study designs typical of real-world settings.

show abstract

“…It should be noted that vertebral fractures make up only a small proportion of FLS case loads [38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45], as shown in table 3. This is an important shortcoming which must be addressed because vertebral fractures are the most common fragility fracture and are underdiagnosed throughout the world [46].…”

Section: Secondary Fracture Preventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mind the (treatment) gap: a global perspective on current and future strategies for prevention of fragility fractures

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-none for this submission. EVM -none for this submission. JAK and PJM have undertaken consultancy for governments, national osteoporosis societies, healthcare professional organisations and private sector companies relating to systematic approaches to fragility fracture care and prevention. JYR has no disclosures related to this work, and has received consultancy, lecture fees and grant support from Amgen, Analis, Asahi Kasei, Boehringer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiltern, Danone, Ebewee Pharma, Endocyte, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, IBSAGenevrier, Lilly, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merckle, Negma, Novartis, NovoNordisk, NPS, Nycomed-Takeda, Organon, Pfizer, PharmEvo, Radius Health, Roche, Rottapharm, Servier, Teijin, Teva, Theramex, Therabel, UCB, Will Pharma, Wyeth, Zodiac. NCWH has no disclosures related to this work, and has received consultancy, lecture fees and honoraria from Alliance for Better Bone Health, AMGEN, MSD, Eli Lilly, Servier, Shire, Consilient Healthcare and Internis Pharma. PJM serves as a consultant to the International Osteoporosis Foundation and received remuneration for his contribution to this manuscript. RR has received honoraria for participation in Advisory boards or speaker bureau fees from Danone, Labatec, Nestlé, and ObsEva. Introduction-This narrative review considers the key challenges facing healthcare professionals and policymakers responsible for providing care to populations in relation to bone health. These challenges broadly fall into 4 distinct themes: Europe PMC Funders Group

show abstract

The fracture and osteoporosis clinic: 1-year results and 3-month compliance

Cited by 42 publications

References 21 publications

3‐year follow‐up of 215 fracture patients from a prospective and consecutive osteoporosis screening program

3‐year follow‐up of 215 fracture patients from a prospective and consecutive osteoporosis screening program

Systematic review on interventions to improve osteoporosis investigation and treatment in fragility fracture patients

Mind the (treatment) gap: a global perspective on current and future strategies for prevention of fragility fractures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About