ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2025
Trends in screening and treatment of osteoporosis after periprosthetic fractures from 2010 to 2020.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteoporosis is often underrecognized and undertreated following periprosthetic fractures (PPF). Our study found that between 2010 and 2020, there has been no significant change in the rates of osteoporosis screening or treatment within 1 year following PPF. Orthopedic surgeons can play an integral role in helping to curtail the osteoporosis epidemic. PURPOSE: Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) typically occur from low-energy mechanisms and are pathognomonic for osteoporosis. However, osteoporosis is often underrecognized and undertreated. The aim of this study was to examine trends in dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans and treatment of osteoporosis after PPF between 2010 and 2020.
methodsPatients older than 40 who experienced a lower extremity PPF between 2010 and 2020 and had no prior history of osteoporosis screening or treatment were identified utilizing a large national administrative database. Rates of bone mineral density (BMD) measurement using DXA and anti-osteoporotic treatment with pharmacotherapy, or either intervention within 1 year following experiencing a PPF were determined. The rate of change for these interventions was calculated using the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR), with linear regression used to determine whether trends were statistically significant.
resultsIn total, 5.7% and 3.6% of patients were screened and treated for osteoporosis, respectively. Between 2010 and 2020, there was no significant change in rates of osteoporosis screening (CAGR + 0.1%; p = 0.13), treatment (CAGR - 2.4%; p = 0.29), or either intervention (CAGR - 1.1%; p = 0.77) within 1 year following PPF. Factors associated with intervention included older age, female sex, and increased comorbidities.
conclusionOur study found that there has been no significant change in the rates of osteoporosis screening or treatment within 1 year following PPF. Orthopedic surgeons and allied healthcare workers can play an integral role in helping to curtail the osteoporosis epidemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39812673What 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.