Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-specific prescriber feedback can increase the rate of osteoporosis screening and treatment: results from two national interventions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Osteoporosis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Summary

Osteoporosis interventions targeting older Australians and clinicians were conducted in 2008 and 2011 as part of a national quality improvement program underpinned by behavioural theory and stakeholder engagement. Uptake of bone mineral density (BMD) tests among targeted men and women increased after both interventions and sustained increases in osteoporosis treatment were observed among men targeted in 2008.

Purpose

Educational interventions incorporating patient-specific prescriber feedback have improved osteoporosis screening and treatment among at-risk patients in clinical trials but have not been evaluated nationally. This study assessed uptake of BMD testing and osteoporosis medicines following two national Australian quality improvement initiatives targeting women (70–79 years) and men (75–85 years) at risk of osteoporosis.

Methods

Administrative health claims data were used to determine monthly rates of BMD testing and initiation of osteoporosis medicines in the 9-months post-intervention among targeted men and women compared to older cohorts of men and women. Log binomial regression models were used to assess differences between groups.

Results

In 2008 91,794 patients were targeted and 52,427 were targeted in 2011. There was a twofold increase in BMD testing after each intervention among targeted patients compared to controls (p < 0.001). Initiation of osteoporosis medicines increased by 21% among men targeted in 2008 and 34% among men targeted in 2011 compared to older controls (p < 0.01). Initiation of osteoporosis medicines among targeted women was similar to the older controls.

Conclusion

Programs underpinned by behavioural theory and stakeholder engagement that target both primary care clinicians and patients can improve osteoporosis screening and management at the national level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Endocrinology Expert Group (2014) Therapeutic guidelines: endocrinology. Melbourne: Therapeutic Guidelines Limited

  2. Gallagher TC, Geling O, Comite F (2002) Missed opportunities for prevention of osteoporotic fracture. Arch Intern Med 162(4):450–456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Parker D (2013) An audit of osteoporotic patients in an Australian general practice. Aust Fam Physician 42(6):423–427

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brennan S, Kotowicz MA, Sarah B, Leslie W, Elbeling P, Metge C et al (2013) Examining the impact of reimbursement on referral to bone density testing for older adults: 8 years of data from the Barwon statistical division. Australia Archives of Osteoporosis 8:152

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morris CA, Cabral D, Cheung H, Katz JN, Finkelstein JS, Avorn J et al (2004) Patterns of bone mineral density testing: current guidelines, testing rates, and interventions. J Gen Intern Med 19(7):783–790

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Ström O, Borgström F, Kanis JA, Compston J, Cooper C, McCloskey EV et al (2011) Osteoporosis: burden, health care provision and opportunities in the EU. Arch Osteoporos 6(1–2):59–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bleicher K, Naganathan V, Cumming RG, Seibel MJ, Sambrook PN, Blyth FM et al (2010) Prevalence and treatment of osteoporosis in older Australian men: findings from the CHAMP study. Med J Aust 193(7):387–391

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gill TK, Taylor AW, Hill CL, Phillips PJ (2012) Osteoporosis in the community: sensitivity of self-reported estimates and medication use of those diagnosed with the condition. Bone & joint research 1(5):93–98

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Giangregorio L, Papaioannou A, Cranney A, Zytaruk N, Adachi JD (2006) Fragility fractures and the osteoporosis care gap: an international phenomenon. Semin Arthritis Rheum 35(5):293–305

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Elliot-Gibson V, Bogoch ER, Jamal SA, Beaton DE (2004) Practice patterns in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis after a fragility fracture: a systematic review. Osteoporos Int 15(10):767–778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen JS, Hogan C, Lyubomirsky G, Sambrook PN (2009) Management of osteoporosis in primary care in Australia. Osteoporos Int 20(3):491–496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Laliberté MC, Perreault S, Jouini G, Shea BJ, Lalonde L (2011) Effectiveness of interventions to improve the detection and treatment of osteoporosis in primary care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 22(11):2743–2768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Solomon DH, Polinski JM, Stedman M, Truppo C, Breiner L, Egan C et al (2007) Improving care of patients at-risk for osteoporosis: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 22(3):362–367

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Lafata JE, Kolk D, Peterson EL, McCarthy BD, Weiss TW, Chen Y-T et al (2007) Improving osteoporosis screening: results from a randomized cluster trial. J Gen Intern Med 22(3):346–351

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Yuksel N, Majumdar SR, Biggs C, Tsuyuki RT (2010) Community pharmacist-initiated screening program for osteoporosis: randomized controlled trial. Osteoporos Int 21(3):391–398

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Roughead EE, Kalisch Ellett LM, Ramsay EN, Pratt NL, Barratt JD, LeBlanc VT et al (2013) Bridging evidence-practice gaps: improving use of medicines in elderly Australian veterans. BMC Health Serv Res 13:514

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bandura A (1989) Human agency in social cognitive theory. Am Psychol 44:1175–1184

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Prochaska JO, Di Clemente CO (1986) Towards a comprehensive model of change. In: Miller WR, Heather N (eds) Treating addictive behaviours: processes of change. Plenum Press, New York, pp 3–27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF (1997) The transtheoretical model of health behaviour change. Am J Health Prom 12(1):38–48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, Goldstein MG, Marcus BH, Rakowski W et al (1994) Stages of change and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviours. Health Psychol 13:39–46

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Green LW, Kreuter MW (1992) CDC's planned approach to community health as an application of PRECEDE and an inspiration for PROCEED. J Health Educ 23:140–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Green LW, Kreuter MW (1995) Health program planning, an educational and ecological approach, 4th edn. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  24. Australian Government Department of Veterans’ Affairs (2011) Treatment population statistics, quarterly report, June 2011. Canberra: DVA. Available from: http://www.dva.gov.au/aboutDVA/Statistics/Documents/TpopJun2011.pdf

  25. Australian Government Department of Health (2014) PBS News 18 December 2006: PBS extension to benefit osteoporosis patients. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. [cited 2014 July 23]; Available from: http://www.pbs.gov.au/info/news/2006/12/alendronate

  26. Henry MJ, Pasco JA, Nicholson GC, Kotowicz MA (2011) Prevalence of osteoporosis in Australian men and women: Geelong osteoporosis study. Med J Aust 195(6):321–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Roughead E, Pratt N, Peck R, Gilbert A (2007) Improving medication safety: influence of a patient-specific prescriber feedback program on rate of medication reviews performed by Australian general medical practitioners. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 16(7):797–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Majumdar SR, Johnson JA, Lier DA, Russell AS, Hanley DA, Blitz S et al (2007) Persistence, reproducibility, and cost-effectiveness of an intervention to improve the quality of osteoporosis care after a fracture of the wrist: results of a controlled trial. Osteoporos Int 18(3):261–270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. National Prescribing Service (2007) NPS News 53. Maintaining bone health to prevent osteoporotic fractures. Sydney: NPS Limited. Available from: http://www.nps.org.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/23862/news53_osteoporosis_0807.pdf

  30. National Prescribing Service (2011) NPS News 73. Reducing fracture risk in osteoporosis. Sydney: NPS Limited. Available from: http://www.nps.org.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/126401/News73_osteoporosis_0511.pdf

  31. Ebeling PR (2011) New drugs for osteoporosis. Aust Prescr 34(6):176–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Romas E (2008) Corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis and fractures. Aust Prescr 31(2):45–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (2010) Clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and older men. South Melbourne: RACGP. Available from: http://www.racgp.org.au/download/documents/Guidelines/Musculoskeletal/racgp_osteo_guideline.pdf

  34. Haynes R, Devereaux P, Guyat G (2002) Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. Evidence Based Medicine 7:36–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Australian Government Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) as part of the Veterans’ MATES program. This manuscript was reviewed by DVA prior to submission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Quality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia

    Lisa M. Kalisch Ellett, N. L. Pratt, J. K. Sluggett, E. N. Ramsay, M. Kerr, V. T. LeBlanc, J. D. Barratt & E. E. Roughead

Authors
  1. Lisa M. Kalisch Ellett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. L. Pratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. K. Sluggett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. N. Ramsay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Kerr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. V. T. LeBlanc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. J. D. Barratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. E. E. Roughead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa M. Kalisch Ellett.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kalisch Ellett, L.M., Pratt, N.L., Sluggett, J.K. et al. Patient-specific prescriber feedback can increase the rate of osteoporosis screening and treatment: results from two national interventions. Arch Osteoporos 12, 17 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0309-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0309-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation