Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40838777›Full record

SynthesisAge and ageing2025

Initiation of anti-osteoporosis medication following hip fracture in older adults: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies from patient and healthcare professional perspectives.

Sabine de Jong-Holthuijsen, Willeke M Ravensbergen, Wilco P Achterberg, Natasha M Appelman-Dijkstra, Jacobijn Gussekloo, Rosalinde K E Poortvliet

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Sabine de Jong-HolthuijsenDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0008-0449-1333
Willeke M RavensbergenDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7238-0469
Wilco P AchterbergDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9227-7135
Natasha M Appelman-DijkstraDept of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Leiden Center for Bone Quality, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5035-127X
Jacobijn GusseklooDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7186-8278
Rosalinde K E PoortvlietDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPharmacological osteoporosis treatment is recommended for secondary fracture prevention in older patients following a hip fracture. However, not all eligible patients receive anti-osteoporosis medication (AOMs). Understanding the decision-making process regarding treatment initiation at patient level may help explain low prescription rates and offer novel solutions beyond organisational initiatives.

objectiveThis systematic review aimed to synthesise data from qualitative studies on the initiation of AOMs after a hip fracture in old age, to (i) explore the experiences and preferences of patients and healthcare professionals in the decision-making process, and (ii) clarify if this explains low prescription rates.

methodsA systematic search in seven medical databases identified qualitative publications on the initiation of AOMs in older hip fracture patients. Thematic synthesis was applied, with the CASP checklist and GRADE-CERQual approach enhancing review's rigour.

resultsTwenty studies were included, revealing two main themes with eight subthemes. The 'addressing' step illustrates that addressing osteoporosis treatment is not self-evident and depends on specialty-specific responsibilities, knowledge and capability, commitment to identifying eligible patients, and the perceived importance and feasibility of treatment. The 'discussing' step highlights the need for patient education, patient perceptiveness, making sense, a patient-centred approach, and patient choice, indicating that discussing treatment is not a clear-cut path.

conclusionsAOM initiation after hip fracture in old age is shaped by a two-step decision-making process of (i) addressing treatment and (ii) discussing treatment-which may partly explain low prescription rates. Beyond organisational strategies, promoting education and awareness may strengthen professional initiative and patient engagement.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsHip FracturesOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesSecondary PreventionAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleQualitative ResearchBone Density Conservation Agentsanti-osteoporosis medicationdecision-makinghip fractureolder peopleosteoporosisqualitativeresearch

Identifiers

PMID40838777
PMCPMC12368851

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.