ArticleCureus2024
Therapeutic Intervention for Osteoporosis of Surgical Cases With Non-Vertebral Fractures for Three Years in a Newly Established Rural Hospital in Japan.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Our hospital was newly opened in the spring of 2020 in a rural area of Japan, with a remarkably developing aging society and population decline. This study aimed to clarify and evaluate the practice of osteoporosis care in our hospital for three years since its establishment. We report a retrospective review of therapeutic interventions for osteoporosis for patients who underwent surgical treatment for non-vertebral fragility fractures in our hospital. Methods We evaluated the practice of osteoporosis intervention in patients who underwent surgery for proximal humerus fractures (PHFs), distal radius fractures (DRFs), or proximal femoral fractures (PFFs) from April 2020 to the end of March 2023. Results There were 115 surgical cases with non-vertebral fractures (10 patients with PHF, 41 patients with DRF, and 64 with PFF). Among the patients who had received osteoporosis treatment at other hospitals before the injury, only 15 (13.0%) patients had been administered therapeutic intervention for osteoporosis by other clinics or hospitals. Also, 82 (71.3%) patients were newly diagnosed with osteoporosis in our hospital after surgery according to the Japanese osteoporosis guideline. New postoperative osteoporosis interventions were administered to 39 (47.0%) patients, of which the rate was higher than the previous reports in Japan. While there was no significant difference between upper limb fracture and PFF in the percentage per young adult mean of spine areal bone marrow density (aBMD), the femoral neck aBMDs in the upper limb fracture group were significantly higher than in the PFF group. The serum total P1NP levels were significantly lower and the 25(OH)D levels were also greater in the upper limb fracture group than in the PFF group, whereas the serum TRACP-5b levels were not significantly different between the two groups. Two (1.7%) patients were affected with secondary fractures during the study period. Conclusions The rates of therapeutic intervention for osteoporosis of patients with non-vertebral fractures, especially in those with upper limb fractures, in our hospital were considered to be greater than those in the previous reports. However, the intervention rate for patients with PFFs was not much, and there was still room for improvement in our hospital concerning osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment.
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.