ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2019
[Establishment of fracture liaison services in Germany].
Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Secondary fracture prevention/Update osteoporosis guidelines 2023 of the Umbrella Organization Osteology].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- [Osteoporosis-risk evaluation and case finding].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- A Fracture Liaison Service for the Secondary Prevention of Osteoporosis: a Single-Center Observational Study.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023Observational
- How relevant is lumbar bone mineral density for the stability of symphyseal implants? A biomechanical cadaver study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis results in fragility fractures that are associated with a high morbidity and mortality as well as an increased risk for subsequent fragility fractures. Thus, the first fragility fracture should be the last. To achieve this goal patients need treatment of osteoporosis according to the prevailing clinical guidelines.
objectiveThis article presents the current clinical care situation of patients with a manifest osteoporosis in Germany and the accompanying risks. As a possible solution the concept of a fracture liaison service (FLS) as a new intersectoral care concept is presented and options for the establishment of FLS in Germany are provided. MATERIAL AND
methodsA literature search (PubMed) was conducted using key terms. The practical experiences of the authors in the context of establishing an FLS were also considered.
resultsCompared to other countries, in Germany only a minority of patients receive treatment for osteoporosis after fragility fractures. To improve the care situation an intersectoral FLS provides a coordinated referral of patients with fragility fractures from inpatient care in hospitals to specialists in private practice. This enables the strict identification and treatment of high-risk patients according to the prevailing clinical guidelines. In Germany, different options exist to structure an FLS under consideration of the local circumstances.
conclusionIn Germany, FLS should be established nationwide and according to uniform standards. This would significantly improve the quality of clinical care of patients with manifest osteoporosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31414147What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.