Changes in total body bone mineral density following a common bone health plan with two versions of a unique bone health supplement: a comparative effectiveness research study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans that: (1) improve nutrition, (2) increase health literacy and, (3) increase physical activity. This study is a response to this call to action.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>After signing an informed consent, 158 adults agreed to follow an open-label bone-health plan for six months after taking a DXA test of bone density, a 43-chemistry blood test panel and a quality of life inventory (AlgaeCal 1). Two weeks after the last subject completed, a second group of 58 was enrolled and followed the identical plan, but with a different bone-health supplement (AlgaeCal 2).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline bone mineral density (BMD) or in variables related to BMD (age, sex, weight, percent body fat, fat mass, or fat-free mass). In both groups, no significant differences in BMD or related variables were found between volunteers and non-volunteers or between those who completed per protocol and those who were lost to attrition.</p> <p>Both groups experienced a significant positive mean annualized percent change (MAPC) in BMD compared to expectation [AlgaeCal 1: 1.15%, <it>p </it>= 0.001; AlgaeCal 2: 2.79%, <it>p </it>= 0.001]. Both groups experienced a positive MAPC compared to baseline, but only AlgaeCal 2 experienced a significant change [AlgaeCal 1: 0.48%, <it>p </it>= 0.14; AlgaeCal 2: 2.18%, <it>p </it>< 0.001]. The MAPC in AlgaeCal 2 was significantly greater than that in AlgaeCal 1 (<it>p </it>= 0.005). The MAPC contrast between compliant and partially compliant subjects was significant for both plans (<it>p </it>= 0.001 and <it>p </it>= 0.003 respectively). No clinically significant changes in a 43-panel blood chemistry test were found nor were there any changes in self-reported quality of life in either group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Following The Plan for six months with either version of the bone health supplement was associated with significant increases in BMD as compared to expected and, in AlgaeCal 2, the increase from baseline was significantly greater than the increase from baseline in AlgaeCal 1. Increased compliance was associated with greater increases in BMD in both groups. No adverse effects were reported in either group.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01114685">NCT01114685</a></p

Corrigendum: A systematic review and economic evaluation of bisphosphonates for the prevention of fragility fractures

Abstract Background Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture. Objectives To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of bisphosphonates [alendronic acid (Fosamax® and Fosamax® Once Weekly, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd), risedronic acid (Actonel® and Actonel Once a Week®, Warner Chilcott UK Ltd), ibandronic acid (Bonviva®, Roche Products Ltd) and zoledronic acid (Aclasta®, Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd)] for the prevention of fragility fracture and to assess their cost-effectiveness at varying levels of fracture risk. Data sources For the clinical effectiveness review, six electronic databases and two trial registries were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews, Clinicaltrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Searches were limited by date from 2008 until September 2014. Review methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of effectiveness studies were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a de novo health economic model was constructed. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for each bisphosphonate treatment strategy and a strategy of no treatment for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and NMA. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. A NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net benefit (INB) was estimated using non-parametric regression. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty. Results Forty-six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review, with 27 RCTs providing data for the fracture NMA and 35 RCTs providing data for the femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) NMA. All treatments had beneficial effects on fractures versus placebo, with hazard ratios varying from 0.41 to 0.92 depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and percentage change in BMD were statistically significant for all treatments. There was no evidence of a difference in effect on fractures between bisphosphonates. A statistically significant difference in the incidence of influenza-like symptoms was identified from the RCTs for zoledronic acid compared with placebo. Reviews of observational studies suggest that upper gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently reported in the first month of oral bisphosphonate treatment, but pooled analyses of placebo-controlled trials found no statistically significant difference. A strategy of no treatment was estimated to have the maximum INB for patients with a 10-year QFracture risk under 1.5%, whereas oral bisphosphonates provided maximum INB at higher levels of risk. However, the PSA suggested that there is considerable uncertainty regarding whether or not no treatment is the optimal strategy until the QFracture score is around 5.5%. In the model using FRAX, the mean INBs were positive for all oral bisphosphonate treatments across all risk categories. Intravenous bisphosphonates were estimated to have lower INBs than oral bisphosphonates across all levels of fracture risk when estimated using either QFracture or FRAX. Limitations We assumed that all treatment strategies are viable alternatives across the whole population. Conclusions Bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures. However, the benefit-to-risk ratio in the lowest-risk patients may be debatable given the low absolute QALY gains and the potential for adverse events. We plan to extend the analysis to include non-bisphosphonate therapies. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006883. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

Impact of Tai Chi exercise on multiple fracture-related risk factors in post-menopausal osteopenic women: a pilot pragmatic, randomized trial

Background: Tai Chi (TC) is a mind-body exercise that shows potential as an effective and safe intervention for preventing fall-related fractures in the elderly. Few randomized trials have simultaneously evaluated TC's potential to reduce bone loss and improve fall-predictive balance parameters in osteopenic women. Methods: In a pragmatic randomized trial, 86 post-menopausal osteopenic women, aged 45-70, were recruited from community clinics. Women were assigned to either nine months of TC training plus usual care (UC) vs. UC alone. Primary outcomes were changes between baseline and nine months of bone mineral density (BMD) of the proximal femur and lumbar spine (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) and serum markers of bone resorption and formation. Secondary outcomes included quality of life. In a subsample (n = 16), quiet standing fall-predictive sway parameters and clinical balance tests were also assessed. Both intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were employed. Results: For BMD, no intent-to-treat analyses were statistically significant; however, per protocol analyses (i.e., only including TC participants who completed $\geq$ 75% training requirements) of femoral neck BMD changes were significantly different between TC and UC (+0.04 vs. -0.98%; P = 0.05). Changes in bone formation markers and physical domains of quality of life were also more favorable in per protocol TC vs. UC (P = 0.05). Changes in sway parameters were significantly improved by TC vs. UC (average sway velocity, P = 0.027; anterior-posterior sway range, P = 0.014). Clinical measures of balance and function showed non-significant trends in favor of TC. Conclusions: TC training offered through existing community-based programs is a safe, feasible, and promising intervention for reducing multiple fracture risks. Our results affirm the value of a more definitive, longer-term trial of TC for osteopenic women, adequately powered to detect clinically relevant effects of TC on attenuation of BMD loss and reduction of fall risk in this population

Tai Chi for osteopenic women: design and rationale of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Post-menopausal osteopenic women are at increased risk for skeletal fractures. Current osteopenia treatment guidelines include exercise, however, optimal exercise regimens for attenuating bone mineral density (BMD) loss, or for addressing other fracture-related risk factors (e.g. poor balance, decreased muscle strength) are not well-defined. Tai Chi is an increasingly popular weight bearing mind-body exercise that has been reported to positively impact BMD dynamics and improve postural control, however, current evidence is inconclusive. This study will determine the effectiveness of Tai Chi in reducing rates of bone turnover in post-menopausal osteopenic women, compared with standard care, and will preliminarily explore biomechanical processes that might inform how Tai Chi impacts BMD and associated fracture risks.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A total of 86 post-menopausal women, aged 45-70y, T-score of the hip and/or spine -1.0 and -2.5, have been recruited from primary care clinics of a large healthcare system based in Boston. They have been randomized to a group-based 9-month Tai Chi program plus standard care or to standard care only. A unique aspect of this trial is its pragmatic design, which allows participants randomized to Tai Chi to choose from a pre-screened list of community-based Tai Chi programs. Interviewers masked to participants' treatment group assess outcomes at baseline and 3 and 9 months after randomization. Primary outcomes are serum markers of bone resorption (C-terminal cross linking telopeptide of type I collagen), bone formation (osteocalcin), and BMD of the lumbar spine and proximal femur (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry). Secondary outcomes include health-related quality-of-life, exercise behavior, and psychological well-being. In addition, kinetic and kinematic characterization of gait, standing, and rising from a chair are assessed in subset of participants (n = 16) to explore the feasibility of modeling skeletal mechanical loads and postural control as mediators of fracture risk.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Results of this study will provide preliminary evidence regarding the value of Tai Chi as an intervention for decreasing fracture risk in osteopenic women. They will also inform the feasibility, value and potential limitations related to the use of pragmatic designs for the study of Tai Chi and related mind-body exercise. If the results are positive, this will help focus future, more in-depth, research on the most promising potential mechanisms of action identified by this study.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>This trial is registered in Clinical Trials.gov, with the ID number of NCT01039012.</p

Fracture in the Elderly Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation (FEMuR): study protocol for a phase II randomised feasibility study of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation package following hip fracture

Objective: To conduct a rigorous feasibility study for a future definitive parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) and economic evaluation of an enhanced rehabilitation package for hip fracture.Setting: Recruitment from 3 acute hospitals in North Wales. Intervention delivery in the community.Participants: Older adults (aged ≥65) who received surgical treatment for hip fracture, lived independently prior to fracture, had mental capacity (assessed by clinical team) and received rehabilitation in the North Wales area.Intervention: Remote randomisation to usual care (control) or usual care+enhanced rehabilitation package (intervention), including six additional home-based physiotherapy sessions delivered by a physiotherapist or technical instructor, novel information workbook and goal-setting diary.Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary: Barthel Activities of Daily Living (BADL). Secondary measures included Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale (NEADL), EQ-5D, ICECAP capability, a suite of self-efficacy, psychosocial and service-use measures and costs. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up by blinded researchers.Results: 62 participants were recruited, 61 randomised (control 32; intervention 29) and 49 (79%) completed 3-month follow-up. Minimal differences occurred between the 2 groups for most outcomes, including BADL (adjusted mean difference 0.5). The intervention group showed a medium-sized improvement in the NEADL relative to the control group, with an adjusted mean difference between groups of 3.0 (Cohen's d 0.63), and a trend for greater improvement in self-efficacy and mental health, but with small effect sizes. The mean cost of delivering the intervention was £231 per patient. There was a small relative improvement in quality-adjusted life year in the intervention group. No serious adverse events relating to the intervention were reported.Conclusions: The trial methods were feasible in terms of eligibility, recruitment and retention. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the rehabilitation package should be tested in a phase III RCT