Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27699441›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2017

Economic evaluation of osteoporosis liaison service for secondary fracture prevention in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients with previous hip fracture in Japan.

K Moriwaki, S Noto

Abstract readEvaluation 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, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prevalence of osteoporosis and incidence of related fractures in developed economies in the Asia Pacific region: a systematic review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. 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
  3. Efficiency of coordinator-based osteoporosis intervention in fragility fracture patients: a prospective 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 · 2021
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Impact of the guidance on fracture Liaison Services and the introduction of a new fee for secondary fracture prevention in Japan: Implementation of secondary fracture prevention during hospitalization for fragility fractures.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Osteoporosis liaison service in Japan.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2019
    Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

K MoriwakiDepartment of Medical Statistics, Kobe Pharmaceutical University, 4-19-1, Motoyamakita, Higashinada, Kobe, 658-8558, Japan. moriwaki@kobepharma-u.ac.jp.
S NotoCenter for Health Economics and QOL Research, 1398, Shimami, Kita-ku, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan.
Kobe Pharmaceutical University · JPNiigata University of Health and Welfare · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of secondary fracture prevention by osteoporosis liaison service (OLS) relative to no therapy in patients with osteoporosis and a history of hip fracture. Secondary fracture prevention by OLS is cost-effective in Japanese women with osteoporosis who have suffered a hip fracture.

introductionThe purpose of this study was to estimate, from the perspective of Japan's healthcare system, the cost-effectiveness of secondary fracture prevention by OLS relative to no therapy in patients with osteoporosis and a history of hip fracture.

methodsA patient-level state transition model was developed to predict lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in patients with or without secondary fracture prevention by OLS. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of secondary fracture prevention compared with no therapy was estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the influence of parameter uncertainty on the base case results.

resultsCompared with no therapy, secondary fracture prevention in patients aged 65 with T-score of -2.5 resulted in an additional lifetime cost of $3396 per person and conferred an additional 0.118 QALY, resulting in an ICER of $28,880 per QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analyses showed that treatment duration and offset time strongly affect the cost-effectiveness of OLS. According to the results of scenario analyses, secondary fracture prevention by OLS was cost-saving compared with no therapy in patients with a family history of hip fracture and high alcohol intake.

conclusionsSecondary fracture prevention by OLS is cost-effective in Japanese women with osteoporosis who have suffered a hip fracture. In addition, secondary fracture prevention is less expensive than no therapy in high-risk patients with multiple risk factors.

Indexed as

AgedBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CostsFemaleHealth Care CostsHip FracturesHumansJapanModels, EconometricOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRecurrenceRisk FactorsSecondary PreventionBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-effectiveness analysisFracture liaison serviceFracture preventionHealth economicsOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID27699441
OpenAlexW2527914130

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.