Closing the osteoporosis care gap – Increased osteoporosis awareness among geriatrics and rehabilitation teams

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A care gap exists between recommendations and practice regarding the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in fracture patients. The current study was designed to determine rates and predictors of in-hospital diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in patients admitted with fragility hip fractures, and to assess differences in these rates since the outset of the multipronged "Fracture? Think Osteoporosis" (FTOP) Program, which includes education of geriatrics and rehabilitation teams.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This is a retrospective cohort study conducted with data from two Hamilton, Ontario, university-based tertiary-care hospitals, and represents a follow-up to a previous study conducted 8 years earlier. Data pertaining to all 354 patients, age >/= 50, admitted between March 2003 and April 2004, inclusive, with a diagnosis of fragility hip fracture were evaluated. Twelve patients were excluded leaving 342 patients for analysis, with 75% female, mean age 81.</p> <p>Outcomes included: Primary – In-hospital diagnosis of osteoporosis and/or initiation of anti-resorptive treatment ("new osteoporosis diagnosis/treatment"). Secondary – In-hospital mortality, BMD referrals, pre-admission osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At admission, 27.8% of patients had a pre-existing diagnosis of osteoporosis and/or were taking anti-resorptive treatment. Among patients with no previous osteoporosis diagnosis/treatment: 35.7% received a new diagnosis of osteoporosis, 21% were initiated on anti-resorptive treatment, and 14.3% received a BMD referral. The greatest predictor of new osteoporosis diagnosis/treatment was transfer to a rehabilitation or geriatrics unit: 79.5% of rehabilitation/geriatrics versus 18.5% of patients receiving only orthopedics care met this outcome (p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>New diagnosis of osteoporosis among patients admitted with hip fracture has improved from 1.8% in the mid 1990's to 35.7%. Initiation of bisphosphonate therapy has likewise improved from 0% to 21%. Although multiple factors have likely contributed, the differential response between rehabilitation/geriatrics versus orthopedics patients suggests that education of the geriatric and rehabilitation teams, including one-on-one and group-based sessions, implemented as part of the FTOP Program, has played a role in this improvement. A significant care gap still exists for patients discharged directly from orthopedic units. The application of targeted inpatient and post-discharge initiatives, such as those that comprise the entire FTOP Program, may be of particular value in this setting.</p

Safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in a clinical setting that reflects Canadian standard of care for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA): Results from the CanACT study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This multicenter, open-label, prospective, single cohort study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in a clinical setting reflecting the Canadian standard of care for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients ≥ 18 years of age with a history of active RA ≥ 3 months and fulfilling Canadian requirements for biological therapy received adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week for 12 weeks. Pre-study DMARD treatment regimens, corticosteroids, or NSAIDs were allowed throughout the study. The primary effectiveness outcome measure was the mean change in 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) from baseline to Week 12. Secondary measures included the proportion of patients achieving joint remission (DAS28 < 2.6) and low-disease activity (DAS28 < 3.2) at Week 12, and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR: moderate and good) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR: ACR20, 50, and 70) responses, as well as responses in ACR core components at Weeks 4, 8, and 12. Subgroup analysis included a comparison of patients naïve to biological DMARD (BDMARD) therapy versus BDMARD-experienced patients. Safety was assessed in terms of adverse and serious adverse events.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 879 patients (mean disease duration > 12 years) were enrolled; 772 (87.9%) completed the 12-week period. Adalimumab treatment was associated with rapid and sustained improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA. Significant improvements in mean DAS28 score were observed as early as Week 4. After 12 weeks of adalimumab treatment, 15.3% and 28.9% of patients achieved clinical remission and low-disease activity, respectively. Similarly, significant improvements in ACR core components were observed as early as Week 4, with continued improvements occurring through 12 weeks. Patients naïve to BDMARD therapy demonstrated numerically greater clinical responses when compared with patients who had experienced prior BDMARD therapy, although both subgroups were associated with significant improvements from baseline. The rates and types of adverse events, as well as the results of laboratory measures, demonstrated that adalimumab was generally safe and well-tolerated.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study demonstrated that, under conditions reflective of the normal clinical practice in Canada, adalimumab is an effective and safe treatment for patients with RA.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00649545">NCT00649545</a>.</p

Exercise and manual physiotherapy arthritis research trial (EMPART): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip is a major cause of functional disability and reduced quality of life. Management options aim to reduce pain and improve or maintain physical functioning. Current evidence indicates that therapeutic exercise has a beneficial but short-term effect on pain and disability, with poor long-term benefit. The optimal content, duration and type of exercise are yet to be ascertained. There has been little scientific investigation into the effectiveness of manual therapy in hip OA. Only one randomized controlled trial (RCT) found greater improvements in patient-perceived improvement and physical function with manual therapy, compared to exercise therapy. METHODS AND DESIGN: An assessor-blind multicentre RCT will be undertaken to compare the effect of a combination of manual therapy and exercise therapy, exercise therapy only, and a waiting-list control on physical function in hip OA. One hundred and fifty people with a diagnosis of hip OA will be recruited and randomly allocated to one of 3 groups: exercise therapy, exercise therapy with manual therapy and a waiting-list control. Subjects in the intervention groups will attend physiotherapy for 6-8 sessions over 8 weeks. Those in the control group will remain on the waiting list until after this time and will then be re-randomised to one of the two intervention groups. Outcome measures will include physical function (WOMAC), pain severity (numerical rating scale), patient perceived change (7-point Likert scale), quality of life (SF-36), mood (hospital anxiety and depression scale), patient satisfaction, physical activity (IPAQ) and physical measures of range of motion, 50-foot walk and repeated sit-to stand tests. DISCUSSION: This RCT will compare the effectiveness of the addition of manual therapy to exercise therapy to exercise therapy only and a waiting-list control in hip OA. A high quality methodology will be used in keeping with CONSORT guidelines. The results will contribute to the evidence base regarding the clinical efficacy for physiotherapy interventions in hip OA

Cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy versus general practitioner care for osteoarthritis of the hip: design of a randomised clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease, causing pain and functional impairments. According to international guidelines, exercise therapy has a short-term effect in reducing pain/functional impairments in knee OA and is therefore also generally recommended for hip OA. Because of its high prevalence and clinical implications, OA is associated with considerable (healthcare) costs. However, studies evaluating cost-effectiveness of common exercise therapy in hip OA are lacking. Therefore, this randomised controlled trial is designed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in conjunction with the general practitioner's (GP) care, compared to GP care alone, for patients with hip OA.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Patients aged ≥ 45 years with OA of the hip, who consulted the GP during the past year for hip complaints and who comply with the American College of Rheumatology criteria, are included. Patients are randomly assigned to either exercise therapy in addition to GP care, or to GP care alone. Exercise therapy consists of (maximally) 12 treatment sessions with a physiotherapist, and home exercises. These are followed by three additional treatment sessions in the 5th, 7th and 9th month after the first treatment session. GP care consists of usual care for hip OA, such as general advice or prescribing pain medication. Primary outcomes are hip pain and hip-related activity limitations (measured with the Hip disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [HOOS]), direct costs, and productivity costs (measured with the PROductivity and DISease Questionnaire). These parameters are measured at baseline, at 6 weeks, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up. To detect a 25% clinical difference in the HOOS pain score, with a power of 80% and an alpha 5%, 210 patients are required. Data are analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Effectiveness is evaluated using linear regression models with repeated measurements. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis and an incremental cost-utility analysis will also be performed.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results of this trial will provide insight into the cost-effectiveness of adding exercise therapy to GPs' care in the treatment of OA of the hip. This trial is registered in the Dutch trial registry <url>http://www.trialregister.nl</url>: trial number <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1462">NTR1462</a>.</p

Seeking legitimacy through CSR: Institutional Pressures and Corporate Responses of Multinationals in Sri Lanka

Arguably, the corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices of multinational enterprises (MNEs) are influenced by a wide range of both internal and external factors. Perhaps most critical among the exogenous forces operating on MNEs are those exerted by state and other key institutional actors in host countries. Crucially, academic research conducted to date offers little data about how MNEs use their CSR activities to strategically manage their relationship with those actors in order to gain legitimisation advantages in host countries. This paper addresses that gap by exploring interactions between external institutional pressures and firm-level CSR activities, which take the form of community initiatives, to examine how MNEs develop their legitimacy-seeking policies and practices. In focusing on a developing country, Sri Lanka, this paper provides valuable insights into how MNEs instrumentally utilise community initiatives in a country where relationship-building with governmental and other powerful non-governmental actors can be vitally important for the long-term viability of the business. Drawing on neo-institutional theory and CSR literature, this paper examines and contributes to the embryonic but emerging debate about the instrumental and political implications of CSR. The evidence presented and discussed here reveals the extent to which, and the reasons why, MNEs engage in complex legitimacy-seeking relationships with Sri Lankan institutions

Superior effect of forceful compared with standard traction mobilizations in hip disability?

The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two compiled physiotherapy programs: one including forceful traction mobilizations, the other including traction with unknown force, in patients with hip disability according to ICF (the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, 2001; WHO), using a block randomized, controlled trial with two parallel treatment groups in a regular private outpatient physiotherapy practice. In the experimental group (E; n = 10) and control group (C; n = 9), the mean (±SD) age for all participants was 59 ± 12 years. They were recruited from outpatient physiotherapy clinics, had persistent pain located at the hip joint for >8 weeks and hip hypomobility. Both groups received exercise, information and manual traction mobilization. In E, the traction force was progressed to 800 N, whereas in C it was unknown. Major outcome measure was the median total change score ≥20 points or ≥50% of the disease- and joint-specific Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), compiled of Pain, Stiffness, Function and Hip-related quality of life (ranging 0–100). The mean (range) treatments received were 13 (7–16) over 5–12 weeks and 20 (18–24) over 12 weeks for E and C, respectively. The experimental group showed superior clinical post-treatment effect on HOOS (≥20 points), in six of 10 participants compared with none of nine in the control group (p = 0.011). The effect size was 1.1. The results suggest that a compiled physiotherapy program including forceful traction mobilizations are short-term effective in reducing self-rated hip disability in primary healthcare. The long-term effect is to be documented

Hypoxia-inducible factor-1α gene polymorphisms and cancer risk: a meta-analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The results from the published studies on the association between <it>hypoxia-inducible factor -1α </it>(HIF-1α) polymorphisms and cancer risk are conflicting. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to investigate the association between <it>HIF-1α </it>1772 C/T and 1790 G/A polymorphisms and cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The meta-analysis for 1772 C/T polymorphism included 4131 cancer cases and 5387 controls, and for 1790 G/A polymorphism included 2058 cancer cases and 3026 controls. Allelic and genotypic comparisons between cases and controls were evaluated. Subgroup analyses by cancer types, ethnicity, and gender were also performed. We included prostate cancer in male subgroup, and female specific cancers in female subgroup.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For the 1772 C/T polymorphism, the analysis showed that the T allele and genotype TT were significantly associated with higher cancer risk: odds ratio (OR) = 1.29 [95% confidence interval (CI, 1.01, 1.65)], P = 0.04, P_{heterogeneity}< 0.00001, and OR = 2.18 [95% CI (1.32, 3.62)], P = 0.003, P_{heterogeneity}= 0.02, respectively. The effect of the genotype TT on cancer especially exists in Caucasians and female subjects: OR = 2.40 [95% CI (1.26, 4.59)], P = 0.008, P_{heterogeneity}= 0.02, and OR = 3.60 [95% CI (1.17, 11.11)], P = 0.03, P_{heterogeneity}= 0.02, respectively. For the 1790 G/A polymorphism, the pooled ORs for allelic frequency comparison and dominant model comparison suggested a significant association of 1790 G/A polymorphism with a decreased breast cancer risk: OR = 0.28 [95% CI (0.08, 0.90)], P = 0.03, P_{heterogeneity}= 0.45, and OR = 0.29 [95% CI (0.09, 0.97)], P = 0.04, P_{heterogeneity}= 0.41, respectively. The frequency of the <it>HIF-1α </it>1790 A allele was very low and only two studies were included in the breast cancer subgroup.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our meta-analysis suggests that the <it>HIF-1α </it>1772 C/T polymorphism is significantly associated with higher cancer risk, and 1790 G/A polymorphism is significantly associated with decreased breast cancer risk. The effect of the 1772 C/T polymorphism on cancer especially exists in Caucasians and female subjects. Only female specific cancers were included in female subgroup, which indicates that the 1772 C/T polymorphism is significantly associated with an increased risk for female specific cancers. The association between the 1790 G/A polymorphism and lower breast cancer risk could be due to chance.</p