Is withholding osteoporosis medication after fracture sometimes rational? A comparison of the risk for second fracture versus death
- PMID: 20889095
- PMCID: PMC2950120
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2009.12.004
Is withholding osteoporosis medication after fracture sometimes rational? A comparison of the risk for second fracture versus death
Abstract
Introduction: Undertreatment of osteoporosis is common, even for high-risk patients. Among the reasons for undertreatment may be a clinician's perception of a lack of treatment benefit, particularly in light of patients' expected future mortality. Among US Medicare beneficiaries, we evaluated the risk for second fracture versus death in the 5 years following a hip, clinical vertebral, and wrist/forearm fracture.
Methods: Using data from 1999 to 2006 for a random 5% sample of US Medicare beneficiaries, we identified individuals who experienced an incident hip, clinical vertebral, or wrist/forearm fracture in 2000 or 2001. We evaluated the risk for a second incident fracture versus death in the following 5 years. Results were stratified by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and medical comorbidities. In light of the competing mortality risk, and assuming 30% efficacy of an osteoporosis medication to prevent a second fracture, we calculated the number of individuals needed to treat (NNT) for 5 years after first fracture to prevent 1 additional subsequent fracture.
Results: We identified 18,853, 12,751, and 7635 persons with an incident hip, clinical vertebral, and wrist/forearm fracture, respectively. Although the 5-year risk of death usually exceeded the risk for second fracture across age, gender, racial groups, and primary fracture type (median ratio of death to second fracture=1.4, interquartile range 0.9, 2.0), the 5-year risk for second fracture was high, varying from a low of 13% to a high of 43%. Across demographic groups, the NNT to prevent a second fracture was low, ranging from 8 to 46.
Conclusion: Among older persons with hip, clinical vertebral, or wrist/forearm fracture, although the risk for death was usually greater than the risk for a second fracture, both were high. The relatively low NNT to prevent 1 additional subsequent fracture fell within a range generally considered acceptable for secondary prevention strategies.
Copyright © 2010 American Medical Directors Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
JC: Research grants: Merck, Procter & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Novartis; Consulting: Roche, UCB, CORRONA, Amgen, Eli Lilly; Speakers bureau: Proctor & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Roche, Novartis
ED: Research grants: Amgen
CCE: Research grants: Novartis, Wyeth; Consultant: Novartis
KGS: research grants: Novartis, Amgen, Aventis, Merck, Procter & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Roche; consulting or speaking: Merck, Proctor and Gamble, Eli Lilly, Roche, Novartis, Amgen
All other coauthors: none
Figures
References
-
- National Osteoporosis Foundation. Clinician’s Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. 2008. [updated 2008; cited accessed April 10, 2008]; Available from.
-
- Burge R, Dawson-Hughes B, Solomon DH, Wong JB, King A, Tosteson A. Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005–2025. J Bone Miner Res. 2007 Mar;22(3):465–75. - PubMed
-
- Quick Reference Information: Medicare Preventive Services. The Medicare Learning Network (MLN) 2007. [updated 2007; cited 2008 March 19]; Second:[page 243]. Available from: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNProducts/downloads/mps_guide_web-061305.pdf.
-
- National Committee for Quality Assurance. State of Health Care Quality. Washington, DC: 2006. Contract No.: Document Number|.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
