Osteoporosis International

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 701–709 | Cite as

Optimizing fracture prevention: the fracture liaison service, an observational study

  • D. A. Eekman
  • S. H. van Helden
  • A. M. Huisman
  • H. J. J. Verhaar
  • I. E. M. Bultink
  • P. P. Geusens
  • P. Lips
  • W. F. Lems
Original Article

Abstract

Summary

The response rate to the invitation to the fracture liaison service and reasons for non-response were evaluated in 2,207 fragility fracture patients. Fifty-one percent responded; non-responders were most often not interested (38 %) or were hip fracture patients. After 1 year of treatment, 88 % was still persistent and 2 % had a new fracture.

Introduction

To increase the percentage of elderly fracture patients undergoing a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurement, and to investigate why some patients did not respond to invitation to our fracture liaison service (FLS).

Methods

In four Dutch hospitals, fracture patients ≥50 years were invited through a written or personal invitation at the surgical outpatient department, for a DXA measurement and visit to our FLS. Patients who did not respond were contacted by telephone. In patients diagnosed with osteoporosis, treatment was started. Patients were contacted every 3 months during 1 year to assess drug persistence and the occurrence of subsequent fractures.

Results

Of the 2,207 patients who were invited, 50.6 % responded. Most frequent reasons for not responding included: not interested (38 %), already screened/under treatment for osteoporosis (15.7 %), physically unable to attend the clinic (11.5 %), and death (5.2 %). Hip fracture patients responded less frequently (29 %) while patients with a wrist (60 %) or ankle fracture (65.2 %) were more likely to visit the clinic. In 337 responding patients, osteoporosis was diagnosed and treatment was initiated. After 12 months of follow-up, 88 % of the patients were still persistent with anti-osteoporosis therapy and only 2 % suffered a subsequent clinical fracture.

Conclusion

In elderly fracture patients, the use of a FLS leads to an increased response rate, a high persistence to drug treatment, and a low rate of subsequent clinical fractures. Additional programs for hip fracture patients are required, as these patients have a low response rate.

Keyword

Fracture Fracture liaison service Osteoporosis Persistence Prevention Response 

References

  1. 1.
    Nederlandse Vereniging voor Reumatologie (2011) CBO richtlijn osteoporose en fractuurpreventie. www.cbo.nl/thema/Richtlijnen/Overzicht-richtlijnen/Bewegingsapparaat/?p=242. Accessed 19 June 2011
  2. 2.
    McGowan B, Casey MC, Silke C, Whelan B, Bennett K (2013) Hospitalisations for fracture and associated costs between 2000 and 2009 in Ireland: a trend analysis. Osteoporos Int 24(3):849–857PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Center JR, Nguyen TV, Schneider D, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA (1999) Mortality after all major types of osteoporotic fracture in men and women: an observational study. Lancet 353:878–882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Center JR, Bliuc D, Nguyen TV, Eisman JA (2007) Risk of subsequent fracture after low-trauma fracture in men and women. JAMA 297:387–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lips P, van Schoor NM (2005) Quality of life in patients with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 16:447–455PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edwards BJ, Bunta AD, Simonelli C, Bolander M, Fitzpatrick LA (2007) Prior fractures are common in patients with subsequent hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 461:226–230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Port L, Center J, Briffa NK, Nguyen T, Cumming R, Eisman J (2003) Osteoporotic fracture: missed opportunity for intervention. Osteoporos Int 14:780–784PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Geel TA, van Helden S, Geusens PP, Winkens B, Dinant GJ (2009) Clinical subsequent fractures cluster in time after first fractures. Ann Rheum Dis 68:99–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Helden HS, Cals J, Kessels F, Brink P, Dinant GJ, Geusens P (2006) Risk of new clinical fractures within 2 years following a fracture. Osteoporos Int 17:348–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bilezikian JP (2009) Efficacy of bisphosphonates in reducing fracture risk in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Am J Med 122:S14–S21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cranney A, Guyatt G, Griffith L, Wells G, Tugwell P, Rosen C (2002) Meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. IX: summary of meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Rev 23:570–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eisman JA, Bogoch ER, Dell R, Harrington JT, McKinney RE Jr, McLellan A, Mitchell PJ, Silverman S, Singleton R, Siris E (2012) Making the first fracture the last fracture: ASBMR task force report on secondary fracture prevention. J Bone Miner Res 27:2039–2046PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hegeman JH, Willemsen G, van Nieuwpoort J, Kreeftenberg HG, van der Veer E, Slaets JP, ten Duis HJ (2004) Effective tracing of osteoporosis at a fracture and osteoporosis clinic in Groningen; an analysis of the first 100 patients. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 148:2180–2185PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huntjens KM, van Geel TA, Blonk MC, Hegeman JH, van der Elst M, Willems P, Geusens PP, Winkens B, Brink P, van Helden SH (2011) Implementation of osteoporosis guidelines: a survey of five large fracture liaison services in the Netherlands. Osteoporos Int 22:2129–2135PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McLellan AR, Gallacher SJ, Fraser M, McQuillian C (2003) The fracture liaison service: success of a program for the evaluation and management of patients with osteoporotic fracture. Osteoporos Int 14:1028–1034PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Blonk MC, Erdtsieck RJ, Wernekinck MG, Schoon EJ (2007) The fracture and osteoporosis clinic: 1-year results and 3-month compliance. Bone 40:1643–1649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McLellan AR, Wolowacz SE, Zimovetz EA, Beard SM, Lock S, McCrink L, Adekunle F, Roberts D (2011) Fracture liaison services for the evaluation and management of patients with osteoporotic fracture: a cost-effectiveness evaluation based on data collected over 8 years of service provision. Osteoporos Int 22:2083–2098PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harrington JT, Lease J (2007) Osteoporosis disease management for fragility fracture patients: new understandings based on three years' experience with an osteoporosis care service. Arthritis Rheum 57:1502–1506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hadji P, Claus V, Ziller V, Intorcia M, Kostev K, Steinle T (2012) GRAND: the German retrospective cohort analysis on compliance and persistence and the associated risk of fractures in osteoporotic women treated with oral bisphosphonates. Osteoporos Int 23:223–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Imaz I, Zegarra P, Gonzalez-Enriquez J, Rubio B, Alcazar R, Amate JM (2010) Poor bisphosphonate adherence for treatment of osteoporosis increases fracture risk: systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 21:1943–1951PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Netelenbos JC, Geusens PP, Ypma G, Buijs SJ (2011) Adherence and profile of non-persistence in patients treated for osteoporosis—a large-scale, long-term retrospective study in the Netherlands. Osteoporos Int 22:1537–1546PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wade SW, Curtis JR, Yu J, White J, Stolshek BS, Merinar C, Balasubramanian A, Kallich JD, Adams JL, Viswanathan HN (2012) Medication adherence and fracture risk among patients on bisphosphonate therapy in a large United States health plan. Bone 50:870–875PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ziller V, Kostev K, Kyvernitakis I, Boeckhoff J, Hadji P (2012) Persistence and compliance of medications used in the treatment of osteoporosis—analysis using a large scale, representative, longitudinal German database. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 50:315–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boudou L, Gerbay B, Chopin F, Ollagnier E, Collet P, Thomas T (2011) Management of osteoporosis in fracture liaison service associated with long-term adherence to treatment. Osteoporos Int 22:2099–2106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ojeda-Bruno S, Naranjo A, Francisco-Hernandez F, Erausquin C, Rua-Figueroa I, Quevedo JC, Rodriguez-Lozano C (2011) Secondary prevention program for osteoporotic fractures and long-term adherence to bisphosphonates. Osteoporos Int 22:1821–1828PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Genant HK, Wu CY, van Kuijk C, Nevitt MC (1993) Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137–1148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman PB, Abbott TA III, Berger M (2000) Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: a summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. J Bone Miner Res 15:721–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Oyen J, Gjesdal CG, Brudvik C, Hove LM, Apalset EM, Gulseth HC, Haugeberg G (2010) Low-energy distal radius fractures in middle-aged and elderly men and women—the burden of osteoporosis and fracture risk: a study of 1,794 consecutive patients. Osteoporos Int 21:1257–1267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harrington JT, Broy SB, Derosa AM, Licata AA, Shewmon DA (2002) Hip fracture patients are not treated for osteoporosis: a call to action. Arthritis Rheum 47:651–654PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    van Helden HS, Cauberg E, Geusens P, Winkes B, van der Weijden T, Brink P (2007) The fracture and osteoporosis outpatient clinic: an effective strategy for improving implementation of an osteoporosis guideline. J Eval Clin Pract 13:801–805PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    British Orthopaedic Association (2007) The care of patients with a fragility fracture. http://www.nhfd.co.uk/003/hipfracturer.nsf/luMenuDefinitions/FCEF9FCB98A1B8EB802579C900553996/$file/Blue_Book.pdf?OpenElement. Accessed 19 June 2011.
  32. 32.
    Australian & New Zealand Hip Fracture Registry. http://www.anzhfr.org/. Accessed 15 May 2013
  33. 33.
    British Orthopaedic Association, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, British Geriatrics Society. National Hip Fracture Database, national report 2012. http://www.nhfd.co.uk/ . Accessed 15 May 2013.
  34. 34.
    Friedman SM, Mendelson DA, Bingham KW, Kates SL (2009) Impact of a comanaged geriatric fracture center on short-term hip fracture outcomes. Arch Intern Med 169:1712–1717PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kammerlander C, Gosch M, Blauth M, Lechleitner M, Luger TJ, Roth T (2011) The Tyrolean geriatric fracture center: an orthogeriatric co-management model. Z Gerontol Geriatr 44:363–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kates SL, Mendelson DA, Friedman SM (2010) Co-managed care for fragility hip fractures (Rochester model). Osteoporos Int 21:S621–S625PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kothawala P, Badamgarav E, Ryu S, Miller RM, Halbert RJ (2007) Systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world adherence to drug therapy for osteoporosis. Mayo Clin Proc 82:1493–1501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Majumdar SR, Johnson JA, Lier DA, Russell AS, Hanley DA, Blitz S, Steiner IP, Maksymowych WP, Morrish DW, Holroyd BR, Rowe BH (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 18:261–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    van Helden HS, van Geel AC, Geusens PP, Kessels A, Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman AC, Brink PR (2008) Bone and fall-related fracture risks in women and men with a recent clinical fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:241–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. A. Eekman
    • 1
  • S. H. van Helden
    • 2
  • A. M. Huisman
    • 3
  • H. J. J. Verhaar
    • 4
  • I. E. M. Bultink
    • 1
  • P. P. Geusens
    • 5
    • 6
  • P. Lips
    • 7
  • W. F. Lems
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RheumatologyVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Trauma SurgeryIsala ClinicsZwolleThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of RheumatologySint Franciscus GasthuisRotterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Geriatric MedicineUniversity Medical Center UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of RheumatologyUniversity HospitalMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Biomedical Research InstituteUniversity HasseltDiepenbeekBelgium
  7. 7.Department of EndocrinologyVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations