ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2020
Evaluation of pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction in parenterally treated patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2022Pooled it
- Does the duration of postmenopausal osteoporosis affect quality of life and satisfaction?Archives of medical science : AMS · 2025Article
- Assessment of the Quality of Life of Women after Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture with Consideration of Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Selected Factors Concerning the State of Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Oral Ibandronate versus Intravenous Zoledronic Acid on Bone Metabolism and Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Japanese Women with Osteoporosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to evaluate pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction in parenterally treated patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis (OP). PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween May 2016 and January 2018, a total of 138 patients (mean age 63.78 years; range, 50 to 70 years) with postmenopausal OP were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were previously treated with denosumab (DEN) and parenteral forms of bisphosphonates such as zoledronic acid (ZOL) and ibandronate (IBN). The pain severity was evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF). The quality of life was evaluated using the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (Qualeffo-41). For the evaluation of patient satisfaction, a three-item questionnaire including satisfaction with the medication, route, and frequency of administration was applied.
resultsOf the patients, 50 received DEN, 48 received ZOL, and 40 received IBN treatment. There was no significant difference in any of the pain parameters. All domains of the Qualeffo-41 were similar among the three groups. The patients in the DEN group were more satisfied with their medication (DEN: 88%, ZOL: 43.75%, and IBN: 52.5%), its administration route (DEN: 84%, ZOL: 43.8%, and IBN: 57.5%), and the frequency of its administration (DEN: 84%, ZOL: 56.25%, and IBN: 52.5%) (p=0.0001).
conclusionNeither of the medication showed a superior effect on quality of life. However, patients were more satisfied with medications used in a six-month interval and applied subcutaneously. Of these three treatment options, DEN seems to be a step ahead in terms of patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.