Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35879537›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2023

Health-Economic Evaluation of the German Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention Program in Rural Areas (OFRA): Mobility and Falls Prevention Classes, Examination of Bone Health, and Consultation on Safety in the Living Environment.

Claudia Konnopka, Gisela Büchele, Dietrich Rothenbacher, Patrick Roigk, Kilian Rapp, Hans-Helmut König

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

6 authors.

Claudia KonnopkaDepartment of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. c.konnopka@uke.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1053-2126
Gisela BücheleInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Dietrich RothenbacherInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Patrick RoigkDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Kilian RappDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Hans-Helmut KönigDepartment of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFragility fractures are one of the leading causes of disability in older adults. Yet, evidence for effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive approaches combining bone health and fall prevention is rare.

objectiveTo conduct a health-economic evaluation of the German osteoporotic fracture prevention program in rural areas (OFRA).

designSecondary cluster-randomized intervention study based on routine data.

participantsAll districts in five federal states in Germany were cluster-randomized as intervention or control districts. OFRA was offered to community-living (a) women aged 75-79 years or (b) women and men aged 70-84 years with a prior fragility fracture in the intervention districts. Individuals who meet these criteria in the control districts were assigned to the control group.

interventionOFRA comprised mobility and falls prevention classes, examination of bone health by bone density measurement, and consultation on safety in the home living environment. MAIN MEASURES: We measured health-care costs and effectiveness in terms of time to fragility fracture or death within 1 year after initial contact, based on health insurance claims data. Implementation costs were recorded by the intervention performers. We calculated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and employed the net-benefit approach to construct a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC). KEY

resultsThere were 9408 individuals in the intervention group and 27,318 in the control group. Mean time to fragility fracture or death (difference: 0.82 days) and health-care costs (difference: 111.73€, p < .01) were reduced, but mean intervention costs (difference: 260.10€) increased total costs (difference: 148.37€, p < .001) in the intervention group. The ICER per fracture-free year of survival was 66,094.63€. The CEAC showed no acceptable probability of cost-effectiveness at a reasonable willingness to pay.

conclusionOFRA showed reduced rates of fragility fractures, but had high implementation costs, resulting in an unfavorable ICER. The cost-effectiveness of OFRA may improve with a longer follow-up.

Indexed as

Osteoporotic FracturesAgedBone DensityCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleReferral and Consultationcost-effectivenessfragility fracturesfrailtynet-benefit approachprevention

Identifiers

PMID35879537
PMCPMC9971377

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.