Effect of vertebral fractures on function, quality of life and hospitalisation the AGES-Reykjavik study.

To access publisher's full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field.Understanding the determinants of health burden after a fracture in ageing populations is important. Assess the effect of clinical vertebral and other osteoporotic fractures on function and the subsequent risk of hospitalisation. Individuals from the prospective population-based cohort study Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility (AGES)-Reykjavik study were examined between 2002 and 2006 and followed up for 5.4 years. A total of 5,764 individuals, 57.7% women, born 1907-35, mean age 77. Method: four groups with a verified fracture status were used; vertebral fractures, other osteoporotic fractures excluding vertebral, non-osteoporotic fractures and not-fractured were compared and analysed for the effect on mobility, strength, QoL, ADL, co-morbidity and hospitalisation. Worst performance on functional tests was in the vertebral fracture group for women (P < 0.0001) and the other osteoporotic fractures group for men (P < 0.05). Both vertebral and other osteoporotic fractures, showed an increased risk of hospitalisation, HR = 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.7) and 1.2 (95% CI: 1.1-1.2) respectively (P < 0.0001). Individuals with vertebral fractures had 50% (P < 0.0001) longer hospitalisation than not-fractured and 33% (P < 0.002) longer than the other osteoporotic fractures group. Individuals with a history of clinical vertebral fracture seem to carry the greatest health burden compared with other fracture groups, emphasising the attention which should be given to those individuals.National Institutes of Health, USA N01-AG-12100 National Institute on Aging Hjartavernd (The Icelandic Heart Association) Althingi (The Icelandic Parliament

Osteoporotic and Neoplastic Compression Fracture Classification on Longitudinal CT

Classification of vertebral compression fractures (VCF) having osteoporotic or neoplastic origin is fundamental to the planning of treatment. We developed a fracture classification system by acquiring quantitative morphologic and bone density determinants of fracture progression through the use of automated measurements from longitudinal studies. A total of 250 CT studies were acquired for the task, each having previously identified VCFs with osteoporosis or neoplasm. Thirty-six features or each identified VCF were computed and classified using a committee of support vector machines. Ten-fold cross validation on 695 identified fractured vertebrae showed classification accuracies of 0.812, 0.665, and 0.820 for the measured, longitudinal, and combined feature sets respectively.Comment: Contributed 4-Page Paper to be presented at the 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), April 13-16, 2016, Prague, Czech Republi

Radiographic and safety details of vertebral body stenting : results from a multicenter chart review

Background: Up to one third of BKP treated cases shows no appreciable height restoration due to loss of both restored height and kyphotic realignment after balloon deflation. This shortcoming has called for an improved method that maintains the height and realignment reached by the fully inflated balloon until stabilization of the vertebral body by PMMA-based cementation. Restoration of the physiological vertebral body height for pain relief and for preventing further fractures of adjacent and distant vertebral bodies must be the main aim for such a method. A new vertebral body stenting system (VBS) stabilizes the vertebral body after balloon deflation until cementation. The radiographic and safety results of the first 100 cases where VBS was applied are presented. Methods: During the planning phase of an ongoing international multicenter RCT, radiographic, procedural and followup details were retrospectively transcribed from charts and xrays for developing and testing the case report forms. Radiographs were centrally assessed at the institution of the first/senior author. Results: 100 patients (62 with osteoporosis) with a total of 103 fractured vertebral bodies were treated with the VBS system. 49 were females with a mean age of 73.2 years; males were 66.7 years old. The mean preoperative anterior-middle-posterior heights were 20.3-17.6-28.0 mm, respectively. The mean local kyphotic angle was 13.1°. The mean preoperative Beck Index (anterior edge height/posterior edge height) was 0.73, the mean alternative Beck Index (middle height/posterior edge height) was 0.63. The mean postoperative heights were restored to 24.5-24.6-30.4 mm, respectively. The mean local kyphotic angle was reduced to 8.9°. The mean postoperative Beck Index was 0.81, the mean alternative one was 0.82. The overall extrusion rate was 29.1%, the symptomatic one was 1%. In the osteoporosis subgroup there were 23.8% extrusions. Within the three months followup interval there were 9% of adjacent and 4% of remote new fractures, all in the osteoporotic group. Conclusions: VBS showed its strengths especially in realignment of crush and biconcave fractures. Given that fracture mobility is present, the realignment potential is sound and increases with the severity of preoperative vertebral body deformation

Bisphosphonates : a cost benefit analysis patient

Introduction: Osteoporotic hip fractures are common in elderly. There is increased risk of sustaining other fractures that incur financial burden on the health system. Prescription of bisphosphonates after osteoporotic hip fracture surgery has been shown to reduce the overall incidence of re-fractures. Methods: All osteoporotic hip fractures treated surgically in Mater Dei Hospital in the year 2011 were analysed in this observational retrospective study. The inclusion criteria were all primary osteoporotic hip fractures. The initiation, or not, of anti-osteoporotic treatment upon discharge from hospital was reviewed. The mortality and re-fracture rate of this cohort was reviewed for a period of 3 years. The cost of hospitalization for hip fracture and re-fractures was calculated based on local health services costs and compared to the benefits of providing a free bisphosphonate medication to each patient. Results: The osteoporotic hip fracture care pathway did not include initiation of anti-osteoporotic therapy after operations. A re-fracture rate of 11.7% over three years predominantly in female patients was observed. In the first year following hip fracture, an estimated direct medical health expenditure due to re-fractures was of €37,642.55 - €48,835.19. Conclusion: Prescribing a bisphosphonate has been found to reduce both the re-fracture and mortality rates. In our study, a bisphosphonate prescription could have reduced the all cause mortality rate of 25.3% to 15.18% over the first year of hip fracture, as well as reduced the financial and social burden incurred due to a re-fracture.peer-reviewe

Recommendations for The Conduct of Economic Evaluations in Osteoporosis: Outcomes of An Experts’ Consensus Meeting Organized by The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) And the US Branch of The International Osteoporosis Foundation

Summary Economic evaluations are increasingly used to assess the value of health interventions, but variable quality and heterogeneity limit the use of these evaluations by decision-makers. These recommendations provide guidance for the design, conduct, and reporting of economic evaluations in osteoporosis to improve their transparency, comparability, and methodologic standards. Introduction This paper aims to provide recommendations for the conduct of economic evaluations in osteoporosis in order to improve their transparency, comparability, and methodologic standards. Methods A working group was convened by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis to make recommendations for the design, conduct, and reporting of economic evaluations in osteoporosis, to define an osteoporosis-specific reference case to serve a minimum standard for all economic analyses in osteoporosis, to discuss methodologic challenges and initiate a call for research. A literature review, a face-to-face meeting in New York City (including 11 experts), and a review/approval by a larger group of experts worldwide (including 23 experts in total) were conducted. Results Recommendations on the type of economic evaluation, methods for economic evaluation, modeling aspects, base-case analysis and population, excess mortality, fracture costs and disutility, treatment characteristics, and model validation were provided. Recommendations for reporting economic evaluations in osteoporosis were also made and an osteoporosis-specific checklist was designed that includes items to report when performing an economic evaluation in osteoporosis. Further, 12 minimum criteria for economic evaluations in osteoporosis were identified and 12 methodologic challenges and need for further research were discussed. Conclusion While the working group acknowledges challenges and the need for further research, these recommendations are intended to supplement general and national guidelines for economic evaluations, improve transparency, quality, and comparability of economic evaluations in osteoporosis, and maintain methodologic standards to increase their use by decision-makers

Impact of generic alendronate cost on the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment

Introduction: Since alendronate became available in generic form in the Unites States in 2008, its price has been decreasing. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of alendronate cost on the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment in postmenopausal women. Methods: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness model of osteoporosis screening and treatment for U.S. women age 65 and older. We assumed screening initiation at age 65 with central dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and alendronate treatment for individuals with osteoporosis; with a comparator of "no screening" and treatment only after fracture occurrence. We evaluated annual alendronate costs of $20 through$800; outcome measures included fractures; nursing home admission; medication adverse events; death; costs; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2010 U.S. dollars per QALY gained. A lifetime time horizon was used, and direct costs were included. Base-case and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Base-case analysis results showed that at annual alendronate costs of $200 or less, osteoporosis screening followed by treatment was cost-saving, resulting in lower total costs than no screening as well as more QALYs (10.6 additional quality-adjusted life-days). When assuming alendronate costs of$400 through $800, screening and treatment resulted in greater lifetime costs than no screening but was highly cost-effective, with ICERs ranging from$714 per QALY gained through $13,902 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening followed by alendronate treatment was robust to joint input parameter estimate variation at a willingness-to-pay threshold of$50,000/QALY at all alendronate costs evaluated. Conclusions: Osteoporosis screening followed by alendronate treatment is effective and highly cost-effective for postmenopausal women across a range of alendronate costs, and may be cost-saving at annual alendronate costs of $200 or less. © 2012 Nayak et al

Physiotherapy rehabilitation for osteoporotic vertebral fracture (PROVE) : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Osteoporosis and vertebral fracture can have a considerable impact on an individual’s quality of life. There is increasing evidence that physiotherapy including manual techniques and exercise interventions may have an important treatment role. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two different physiotherapy approaches for people with osteoporosis and vertebral fracture, in comparison to usual care. Methods/Design: Six hundred people with osteoporosis and a clinically diagnosed vertebral fracture will be recruited and randomly allocated to one of three management strategies, usual care (control - A), an exercise-based physiotherapy intervention (B) or a manual therapy-based physiotherapy intervention (C). Those in the usual care arm will receive a single session of education and advice, those in the active treatment arms (B + C) will be offered seven individual physiotherapy sessions over 12 weeks. The trial is designed as a prospective, adaptive single-blinded randomised controlled trial. An interim analysis will be completed and if one intervention is clearly superior the trial will be adapted at this point to continue with just one intervention and the control. The primary outcomes are quality of life measured by the disease specific QUALLEFO 41 and the Timed Loaded Standing test measured at 1 year. Discussion: There are a variety of different physiotherapy packages used to treat patients with osteoporotic vertebral fracture. At present, the indication for each different therapy is not well defined, and the effectiveness of different modalities is unknown