Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for imaging of the lateral spine during DXA-measurement of the spine and hips may contribute to detect vertebral fractures. We advocate performing a VFA in all patients with a recent fracture visiting a fracture liaison service (FLS). Fracture liaison services (FLS) are important service models for delivering secondary fracture prevention for older adults presenting with a fragility fracture. While commonly age, clinical risk factors (including fracture site and number of prior fracture) and BMD play a crucial role in determining fracture risk and indications for treatment with antiosteoporosis medications, prevalent vertebral fractures usually remain undetected. However, vertebral fractures are important independent risk factors for future vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. A development of the DXA technology, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), allows for assessment of the lateral spine during the regular DXA bone mineral density measurement of the lumbar spine and hips. Recent approaches to the stratification of antiosteoporosis medication type according to baseline fracture risk, and differences by age in the indication for treatment by prior fracture mean that additional information from VFA may influence initiation and type of treatment. Furthermore, knowledge of baseline vertebral fractures allows reliable definition of incident vertebral fracture events during treatment, which may modify the approach to therapy. In this manuscript, we will discuss the epidemiology and clinical significance of vertebral fractures, the different methods of detecting vertebral fractures, and the rationale for, and implications of, use of VFA routinely in FLS. • Vertebral fracture assessment is a tool available on modern DXA instruments and has proven ability to detect vertebral fractures, the majority of which occur without a fall and without the signs and symptoms of an acute fracture. • Most osteoporosis guidelines internationally suggest that treatment with antiosteoporosis medications should be considered for older individuals (e.g., 65 years +) with a recent low trauma fracture without the need for DXA. • Younger individuals postfracture may be risk-assessed on the basis of FRAX® probability including DXA and associated treatment thresholds. • Future fracture risk is markedly influenced by both site, number, severity, and recency of prior fracture; awareness of baseline vertebral fractures facilitates definition of true incident vertebral fracture events occurring during antiosteoporosis treatment. • Detection of previously clinically silent vertebral fractures, defining site of prior fracture, might alter treatment decisions in younger or older FLS patients, consistent with recent IOF-ESCEO guidance on baseline-risk-stratified therapy, and provides a reliable baseline from which to define new, potentially therapy-altering, vertebral fracture events.

/pdf/vertebral-fracture-epidemiology-impact-and-use-of-dxa-1l0tuuim71.pdf

Vertebral fracture: epidemiology, impact and use of DXA vertebral fracture assessment in fracture liaison services.

Several guidelines recommend a bone and fall-related osteoporosis risk assessment in all patients with fracture and age > 50 years. In practice, however, there is no consensus whether screening > 85 years is useful. To evaluate the subsequent fracture risk in all patient > 85 years, comparing the two populations of Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) attenders and non-attenders. All patients > 85 years that presented at the FLS with a non-vertebral fracture were included in the study during a 5-year period (September 2004 and December 2009). Excluded were pathologic fractures, death   85 years seems to be limited. In practice a large proportion of these patients are not screened.

The role of the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) in subsequent fracture prevention in the extreme elderly.

This study demonstrates a substantial and persistent anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in men and women ≥50 years old who sustained major osteoporotic fracture(s) between 2005 and 2014 in Denmark. This was not substantially reduced by including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis treatments. Strengthened post-fracture organization of care and secondary fracture prevention is highly needed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Danish anti-osteoporosis treatment gap from 2005 to 2014 in patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and to assess the impact of including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) on the treatment gap among these patients. In this retrospective, registry-based study, we included men and women aged 50 years or older and living in Denmark, who sustained at least one MOF between 2005 and 2014. We applied a repeated cross-sectional design to generate cohorts of patients sustaining a first MOF, hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fracture, respectively, within each calendar year. We evaluated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients within each cohort not receiving treatment with AOM within 1 year of the fracture. Hospital-administered AOM was identified by SKS code. The treatment gap among MOF patients decreased from 85% in 2005 to 79% in 2014. The gap was smaller among hip and vertebral fracture patients as compared to humerus and forearm fracture patients, and it was smaller in women than in men. The use of hospital-administered AOM was relatively uncommon, with a maximum of 0.9% of MOF patients initiating hospital-administered AOM (in 2012). We observed substantial variations in this proportion between fracture types and gender. Hospital-administered AOM was most commonly used among vertebral fracture patients. A significant treatment gap among patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture was present throughout our analysis, and including hospital-administered AOM did not significantly improve the treatment gap assessment. Improved secondary fracture prevention is urgently needed.

/pdf/the-treatment-gap-after-major-osteoporotic-fractures-in-2gf2ymo94a.pdf

The treatment gap after major osteoporotic fractures in Denmark 2005-2014: a combined analysis including both prescription-based and hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications.

This systematic review and meta-analysis found low-quality evidence that orthogeriatric care is positively associated with diagnosis of osteoporosis, prescription of calcium and vitamin D supplements and bisphosphonates in older hip fracture patients Evidence on fall and fracture prevention was scarce and inconclusive Orthogeriatrics may reduce the treatment gap following hip fractures Hip fracture patients are at imminent risk of additional fractures and falls Orthogeriatric care might reduce the osteoporosis treatment gap and improve outcomes in these patients However, the optimal orthogeriatric care model (geriatric liaison service, co-management, or geriatrician-led care) remains unclear To summarize the association of different orthogeriatric care models for older hip fracture patients, compared to usual orthopaedic care, with fall prevention measures, diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis and future falls and fractures Two independent reviewers retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled observational studies Random effects meta-analysis was applied (PROSPERO ID: 165914) One RCT and twelve controlled observational studies were included, encompassing 20,078 participants (68% women, median ages between 75 and 85 years) Orthogeriatric care was associated with higher odds of diagnosing osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR] 1136; 95% confidence interval [CI] 726–1777), initiation of calcium and vitamin D supplements (OR 4144; 95% CI 707–24291) and discharge on anti-osteoporosis medication (OR 706; 95% CI 287–1734) However, there was substantial heterogeneity in these findings Evidence on fall prevention and subsequent fractures was scarce and inconclusive Almost all studies were at high risk of bias Evidence was insufficient to compare different care models directly against each other Low-quality evidence suggests that orthogeriatric care is associated with higher rates of diagnosing osteoporosis, initiation of calcium and vitamin D supplements and anti-osteoporosis medication Whether orthogeriatric care prevents subsequent falls and fractures in older hip fracture patients remains unclear

Association of orthogeriatric care models with evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk offuture fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the riskfor second fractures is highest in the early post-fracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring foradverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease). (c) 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. (Less)

/pdf/secondary-fracture-prevention-consensus-clinical-lsnmee1vt3.pdf

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations From a Multistakeholder Coalition.

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. 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. 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. 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  80% levels except for treatment recommendation where a level of 50% was used. 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.

/pdf/a-patient-level-key-performance-indicator-set-to-measure-the-3m1sk7bl3w.pdf

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

R. Speerin

Papers

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