Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35325260›Full record

ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2022

Post-fracture care programs for prevention of subsequent fragility fractures: a literature assessment of current trends.

K E Åkesson, K Ganda, C Deignan, M K Oates, A Volpert, K Brooks, D Lee, D R Dirschl, A J Singer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Examining treatment targets and equity in bone-active medication use within secondary fracture prevention: 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 · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

9 authors.

K E ÅkessonFaculty of Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden. kristina.akesson@med.lu.se.
K GandaConcord Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
C DeignanGlobal Clinical Development, Amgen Inc., CA, Thousand Oaks, USA.
M K OatesGlobal Clinical Development, Amgen Inc., CA, Thousand Oaks, USA.
A VolpertBioScience Communications, New York, NY, USA.
K BrooksUCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium.
D LeeGlobal Marketing, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
D R DirschlDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
A J SingerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Post-fracture care (PFC) programs evaluate and manage patients with a minimal trauma or fragility fracture to prevent subsequent fractures. We conducted a literature review to understand current trends in PFC publications, evaluate key characteristics of PFC programs, and assess their clinical effectiveness, geographic variations, and cost-effectiveness. We performed a search for peer-reviewed articles published between January 2003 and December 2020 listed in PubMed or Google Scholar. We categorized identified articles into 4 non-mutually exclusive PFC subtopics based on keywords and abstract content: PFC Types, PFC Effectiveness/Success, PFC Geography, and PFC Economics. The literature search identified 784 eligible articles. Most articles fit into multiple PFC subtopics (PFC Types, 597; PFC Effectiveness/Success, 579; PFC Geography, 255; and PFC Economics, 98). The number of publications describing how PFC programs can improve osteoporosis treatment rates has markedly increased since 2003; however, publication gaps remain, including low numbers of publications from some countries with reported high rates of osteoporosis and/or hip fractures. Fracture liaison services and geriatric/orthogeriatric services were the most common models of PFC programs, and both were shown to be cost-effective. We identified a need to expand and refine PFC programs and to standardize patient identification and reporting on quality improvement measures. Although there is an increasing awareness of the importance of PFC programs, publication gaps remain in most countries. Improvements in established PFC programs and implementation of new PFC programs are still needed to enhance equitable patient care to prevent occurrence of subsequent fractures.

Indexed as

Hip FracturesOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality ImprovementSecondary PreventionCare coordinationfracture liaison servicegeriatric/orthogeriatric serviceosteoporosispost-fracture care

Identifiers

PMID35325260
PMCPMC8943355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.