The utilization of appropriate osteoporosis medications improves following a multifaceted educational intervention: the Canadian quality circle project (CQC)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Osteoporosis is a serious but treatable condition. However, appropriate therapy utilization of the disease remains suboptimal. Thus, the objective of the study was to change physicians' therapy administration behavior in accordance with the Osteoporosis Canada 2002 guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Project was a two year cohort study that consisted of five Quality Circle (QC) phases that included: 1) Training & Baseline Data Collection, 2) First Educational Intervention & First Follow-Up Data Collection 3) First Strategy Implementation Session, 4) Final Educational Intervention & Final Follow-up Data Collection, and 5) Final Strategy Implementation Session. A total of 340 family physicians formed 34 QCs and participated in the study. Physicians evaluated a total of 8376, 7354 and 3673 randomly selected patient charts at baseline, follow-up #1 and the final follow-up, respectively. Patients were divided into three groups; the high-risk, low-risk, and low-risk without fracture groups. The generalized estimating equations technique was utilized to model the change over time of whether physicians</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The odds of appropriate therapy was 1.29 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.46), and 1.41 (95% CI: 1.20, 1.66) in the high risk group, 1.15 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.36), and 1.16 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.44) in the low risk group, and 1.20 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.43), and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.55) in the low risk group without fractures at follow-up #1 and the final follow-up, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>QCs methodology was successful in increasing physicians' appropriate use of osteoporosis medications in accordance with Osteoporosis Canada guidelines.</p

Optimizing care in osteoporosis: The Canadian quality circle project

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While the Osteoporosis Canada 2002 Canadian guidelines provided evidence based strategies in preventing, diagnosing, and managing this condition, publication and distribution of guidelines have not, in and of themselves, been shown to alter physicians clinical approaches. We hypothesize that primary care physicians enrolled in the Quality Circle project would change their patient management of osteoporosis in terms of awareness of osteoporosis risk factors and bone mineral density testing in accordance with the guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The project consisted of five Quality Circle phases that included: 1) Training & Baseline Data Collection, 2) First Educational Intervention & First Follow-Up Data Collection 3) First Strategy Implementation Session, 4) Final Educational Intervention & Final Follow-up Data Collection, and 5) Final Strategy Implementation Session. A total of 340 circle members formed 34 quality circles and participated in the study. The generalized estimating equations approach was used to model physician awareness of risk factors for osteoporosis and appropriate utilization of bone mineral density testing pre and post educational intervention (first year of the study). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After the 1^styear of the study, physicians' certainty of their patients' risk factor status increased. Certainty varied from an OR of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.1, 1.8) for prior vertebral fracture status to 6.3 (95% CI: 2.3, 17.9) for prior hip fracture status. Furthermore, bone mineral density testing increased in high risk as compared with low risk patients (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.7).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Quality Circle methodology was successful in increasing both physicians' awareness of osteoporosis risk factors and appropriate bone mineral density testing in accordance with the 2002 Canadian guidelines.</p

IOF position on scientists and societies operating in conflict zones

This position paper of the International Osteoporosis Foundation reports the findings of an IOF Commission to consider to recommend rules of partnership with scientists belonging to a country which is currently responsible for an armed conflict, anywhere in the world. The findings and recommendations have been adopted unanimously by the Board of IOF.</p

A discrete-choice experiment to assess patients’ preferences for osteoarthritis treatment: An ESCEO working group

Objective: To evaluate the preferences of patients with osteoarthritis for treatment. Methods: A discrete-choice experiment was conducted among adult OA patients who were presented with 12 choice sets of two treatment options and asked in each to select the treatment they would prefer. Based on literature reviews, expert consultation, patient survey and expert meeting, treatment options were characterized by seven attributes: improvement in pain, improvement in walking, ability to manage domestic activities, ability to manage social activities, improvement in overall energy and well-being, risk of moderate/severe side effects and impact on disease progression. Random parameters logit model was used to estimate patients’ preferences and a latent class model was conducted to explore preferences classes. Results: 253 OA patients from seven European countries were included (74% women; mean age 71.3 years). For all seven treatment attributes, significant differences were observed between levels. Given the range of levels of each attribute, the most important treatment attribute in this group was impact on disease progression (29.5%) followed by walking improvement (17.1%) and pain improvement (16.3%). The latent class model identified two preference classes. In the first class (probability of 56%), patients valued impact of disease progression the most (39%). In the second class, walking improvement and improvement in overall energy and well-being were the most important (23%). Conclusion: This study suggests that all seven treatment attributes were important for OA patients. Overall, given the range of levels, the most important outcomes were impact on disease progression and improvement in pain and walking

A discrete-choice experiment to assess patients' preferences for osteoarthritis treatment: An ESCEO working group

Objective: To evaluate the preferences of patients with osteoarthritis for treatment. Methods: A discrete-choice experiment was conducted among adult OA patients who were presented with 12 choice sets of two treatment options and asked in each to select the treatment they would prefer. Based on literature reviews, expert consultation, patient survey and expert meeting, treatment options were characterized by seven attributes: improvement in pain, improvement in walking, ability to manage domestic activities, ability to manage social activities, improvement in overall energy and well-being, risk of moderate/severe side effects and impact on disease progression. Random parameters logit model was used to estimate patients' preferences and a latent class model was conducted to explore preferences classes. Results: 253 OA patients from seven European countries were included (74% women; mean age 71.3 years). For all seven treatment attributes, significant differences were observed between levels. Given the range of levels of each attribute, the most important treatment attribute in this group was impact on disease progression (29.5%) followed by walking improvement (17.1%) and pain improvement (16.3%). The latent class model identified two preference classes. In the first class (probability of 56%), patients valued impact of disease progression the most (39%). In the second class, walking improvement and improvement in overall energy and well-being were the most important (23%). Conclusion: This study suggests that all seven treatment attributes were important for OA patients. Overall, given the range of levels, the most important outcomes were impact on disease progression and improvement in pain and walking. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc

Practical guidance for engaging patients in health research, treatment guidelines and regulatory processes: results of an expert group meeting organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO)

There is increasing emphasis on patient-centred research to support the development, approval and reimbursement of health interventions that best meet patients’ needs. However, there is currently little guidance on how meaningful patient engagement may be achieved. An expert working group, representing a wide range of stakeholders and disciplines, was convened by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through a structured, collaborative process the group generated practical guidance to facilitate optimal patient engagement in clinical development and regulatory decisions. Patient engagement is a relational process. The principles outlined in this report were based on lessons learned through applied experience and on an extensive dialogue among the expert participants. This practice guidance forms a starting point from which tailoring of the approach to suit different chronic diseases may be undertaken

Algorithm for the management of patients at low, high and very high risk osteoporotic fractures

SummaryGuidance is provided in an international setting on the assessment and specific treatment of postmenopausal women at low, high and very high risk of fragility fractures.IntroductionThe International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2019. This manuscript seeks to apply this in an international setting, taking additional account of further categorisation of increased risk of fracture, which may inform choice of therapeutic approach.MethodsClinical perspective and updated literature search.ResultsThe following areas are reviewed: categorisation of fracture risk and general pharmacological management of osteoporosis.ConclusionsA platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use to characterise fracture risk and direct interventions

Interdisciplinary management of FGF23-related phosphate wasting syndromes: a Consensus Statement on the evaluation, diagnosis and care of patients with X-linked hypophosphataemia

X-linked hypophosphataemia (XLH) is the most frequent cause of hypophosphataemia-associated rickets of genetic origin and is associated with high levels of the phosphaturic hormone fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23). In addition to rickets and osteomalacia, patients with XLH have a heavy disease burden with enthesopathies, osteoarthritis, pseudofractures and dental complications, all of which contribute to reduced quality of life. This Consensus Statement presents the outcomes of a working group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases, and provides robust clinical evidence on management in XLH, with an emphasis on patients' experiences and needs. During growth, conventional treatment with phosphate supplements and active vitamin D metabolites (such as calcitriol) improves growth, ameliorates leg deformities and dental manifestations, and reduces pain. The continuation of conventional treatment in symptom-free adults is still debated. A novel therapeutic approach is the monoclonal anti-FGF23 antibody burosumab. Although promising, further studies are required to clarify its long-term efficacy, particularly in adults. Given the diversity of symptoms and complications, an interdisciplinary approach to management is of paramount importance. The focus of treatment should be not only on the physical manifestations and challenges associated with XLH and other FGF23-mediated hypophosphataemia syndromes, but also on the major psychological and social impact of the disease

Practical guidance for engaging patients in health research, treatment guidelines and regulatory processes: results of an expert group meeting organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO)

There is increasing emphasis on patient-centred research to support the development, approval and reimbursement of health interventions that best meet patients’ needs. However, there is currently little guidance on how meaningful patient engagement may be achieved. An expert working group, representing a wide range of stakeholders and disciplines, was convened by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through a structured, collaborative process the group generated practical guidance to facilitate optimal patient engagement in clinical development and regulatory decisions. Patient engagement is a relational process. The principles outlined in this report were based on lessons learned through applied experience and on an extensive dialogue among the expert participants. This practice guidance forms a starting point from which tailoring of the approach to suit different chronic diseases may be undertaken.</p