Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17086470›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2007

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.

S R Majumdar, J A Johnson, D A Lier, A S Russell, D A Hanley, S Blitz, I P Steiner, W P Maksymowych, D W Morrish, B R Holroyd and 1 more

Abstract readControlled Clinical TrialMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Return on investment of fracture liaison services: a systematic review and analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Economic impact and cost-effectiveness of fracture liaison services: a systematic review of the literature.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Identifying characteristics of an effective fracture liaison service: systematic literature review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Effectiveness of interventions to improve the detection and treatment of osteoporosis in primary care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2011
    Pooled it
  7. Systematic review on interventions to improve osteoporosis investigation and treatment in fragility fracture patients.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2011
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Interventions to improve adherence and persistence with osteoporosis medications: a systematic literature review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2009
    Pooled it
  10. Describing the resource utilisation and costs associated withvertebral fractures: the Build Better Bones with Exercise (B3E) Pilot Trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020
    Trial
  11. Evaluation of a Multimodal, Direct-to-Patient Educational Intervention Targeting Barriers to Osteoporosis Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2018
    Trial
  12. Patient-activation and guideline-concordant pharmacological treatment after bone density testing: the PAADRN randomized controlled trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016
    Trial
  13. Impact of a centralized osteoporosis coordinator on post-fracture osteoporosis management: a cluster randomized trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2012
    Trial
  14. Cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve quality of osteoporosis care after wrist fracture.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2011
    Trial
  15. Multifaceted intervention to improve diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in patients with recent wrist fracture: a randomized controlled trial.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2008
    Trial
  16. Activating Patients With a Tailored Bone Density Test Results Letter and Educational Brochure: the PAADRN Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry
    Trial
  17. Secondary fracture prevention in primary care: a narrative review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S R MajumdarDepartment of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. me2.majumdar@ualberta.ca
J A Johnson
D A Lier
A S Russell
D A Hanley
S Blitz
I P Steiner
W P Maksymowych
D W Morrish
B R Holroyd
B H Rowe
University of Alberta · CAUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOlder patients with fragility fractures are not commonly tested or treated for osteoporosis. Compared to usual care, a previously reported intervention led to 30% absolute increases in osteoporosis treatment within 6 months of wrist fracture. Our objective was to examine longer-term outcomes, reproducibility, and cost-effectiveness of this intervention.

methodsWe conducted an extended analysis of a non-randomized controlled trial with blinded ascertainment of outcomes that compared a multifaceted intervention to usual care controls. Patients >50 years with a wrist fracture treated in two Emergency Departments in the province of Alberta, Canada were included; those already treated for osteoporosis were excluded. Overall, 102 patients participated in this study (55 intervention and 47 controls; median age: 66 years; 78% were women). The interventions consisted of faxed physician reminders that contained osteoporosis treatment guidelines endorsed by opinion leaders and patient counseling. Controls received usual care; at 6-months post-fracture, when the original trial was completed, all controls were crossed-over to intervention. The main outcomes were rates of osteoporosis testing and treatment within 6 months (original study) and 1 year (delayed intervention) of fracture, and 1-year persistence with treatments started. From the perspective of the healthcare payer, the cost-effectiveness (using a Markov decision-analytic model) of the intervention was compared with usual care over a lifetime horizon.

resultsOverall, 40% of the intervention patients (vs. 10% of the controls) started treatment within 6 months post-fracture, and 82% (95%CI: 67-96%) had persisted with it at 1-year post-fracture. Delaying the intervention to controls for 6 months still led to equivalent rates of bone mineral density (BMD) testing (64 vs. 60% in the original study; p = 0.72) and osteoporosis treatment (43 vs. 40%; p = 0.77) as previously reported. Compared with usual care, the intervention strategy was dominant - per patient, it led to a $13 Canadian (U.S. $9) cost savings and a gain of 0.012 quality-adjusted life years. Base-case results were most sensitive to assumptions about treatment cost; for example, a 50% increase in the price of osteoporosis medication led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $24,250 Canadian (U.S. $17,218) per quality-adjusted life year gained.

conclusionsA pragmatic intervention directed at patients and physicians led to substantial improvements in osteoporosis treatment, even when delivered 6-months post-fracture. From the healthcare payer's perspective, the intervention appears to have led to both cost-savings and gains in life expectancy.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overAlbertaBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleFractures, BoneHealth Care CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalPatient ComplianceBone Density Conservation Agents

Identifiers

PMID17086470
OpenAlexW2038919046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.