Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34715838›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2021

Improvement of osteoporosis Care Organized by Nurses: ICON study - Protocol of a quasi-experimental study to assess the (cost)-effectiveness of combining a decision aid with motivational interviewing for improving medication persistence in patients with a recent fracture being treated at the fracture liaison service.

Dennis Cornelissen, Annelies Boonen, Silvia Evers, Joop P van den Bergh, Sandrine Bours, Caroline E Wyers, Sander van Kuijk, Marsha van Oostwaard, Trudy van der Weijden, Mickaël Hiligsmann

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending Fracture Liaison Services.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Article
  7. Cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent-adherence intervention in fracture liaison services.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024
    Article
  8. Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping 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
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Development and usability of a decision aid to initiate anti-osteoporosis medication treatment in patients visiting the fracture liaison service with a recent fracture.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Long-term and sequential treatment for osteoporosis.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2023
    Review
  13. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 5 countries.

Dennis CornelissenDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. d.cornelissen@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3977-580X
Annelies BoonenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center; and Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Silvia EversDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Joop P van den BerghDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, The Netherlands.
Sandrine BoursDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Caroline E WyersDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, The Netherlands.
Sander van KuijkDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (KEMTA), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Marsha van OostwaardDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, The Netherlands.
Trudy van der WeijdenDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Mickaël HiligsmannDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

ZonMw 848016001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven the health and economic burden of fractures related to osteoporosis, suboptimal adherence to medication and the increasing importance of shared-decision making, the Improvement of osteoporosis Care Organized by Nurses (ICON) study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of a multi-component adherence intervention (MCAI) for patients with an indication for treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication, following assessment at the Fracture Liaison Service after a recent fracture. The MCAI involves two consultations at the FLS. During the first consultation, a decision aid is will be used to involve patients in the decision of whether to start anti-osteoporosis medication. During the follow-up visit, the nurse inquires about, and stimulates, medication adherence using motivational interviewing techniques.

methodsA quasi-experimental trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness and feasibility of an MCAI, consisting of a decision aid (DA) at the first visit, combined with nurse-led adherence support using motivational interviewing during the follow-up visit, in comparison with care as usual, in improving adherence to oral anti-osteoporosis medication for patients with a recent fracture two Dutch FLS. Medication persistence, defined as the proportion of patients who are persistent at one year assuming a refill gap < 30 days, is the primary outcome. Medication adherence, decision quality, subsequent fractures and mortality are the secondary outcomes. A lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis using a model-based economic evaluation and a process evaluation will also be conducted. A sample size of 248 patients is required to show an improvement in the primary outcome with 20%. Study follow-up is at 12 months, with measurements at baseline, after four months, and at 12 months. DISCUSSION: We expect that the ICON-study will show that the MCAI is a (cost-)effective intervention for improving persistence with anti-osteoporosis medication and that it is feasible for implementation at the FLS.

trial registrationThis trial has been registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (Trial NL7236 (NTR7435)). Version 1.0; 26-11-2020.

Indexed as

Motivational InterviewingNursesOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesHumansMedication AdherenceNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicCost-effectivenessDecision aidFracture liaison serviceMedication adherenceMedication persistenceNurseOsteoporosisPatient participationProcess evaluationProtocol

Identifiers

PMID34715838
PMCPMC8555732
OpenAlexW3208754205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.