Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Aug 29;15(1):137.
doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-00799-0.

Updated approach for the management of osteoporosis in Turkey: a consensus report

Yeşim Kirazlı  1 , Funda Atamaz Çalış  2 , Özlem El  3 , Yeşim Gökçe Kutsal  4 , Özlen Peker  3 , Dilsad Sindel  5 , Şansın Tuzun  6 , Dilek Gogas Yavuz  7 , Berrin Durmaz  2 , Ülkü Akarirmak  6 , Hatice Bodur  8 , Vedat Hamuryudan  9 , Umit Inceboz  10 , Sema Öncel  3
Affiliations
Review

Updated approach for the management of osteoporosis in Turkey: a consensus report

Yeşim Kirazlı et al. Arch Osteoporos. .

Abstract

As a result of the current demographics, increased projections of osteoporosis (OP) and prevalence of the disease in Turkey, a panel of multidisciplinary experts developed a thorough review to assist clinicians in identifying OP and associated fracture risk patients, diagnosing the disease with the appropriate available diagnostic methods, classifying the disease, and initiating appropriate treatment. The panel expects to increase the awareness of this prevalent disease, decrease consequences of OP with corresponding cost savings and, ultimately, decrease the overall burden of OP and related fractures in Turkey.

Background: OP is not officially accepted as a chronic disease in Turkey despite the high prevalence and predicted increase in the following years. However, there are areas where the country is performing well, such as having a country-specific fracture risk assessment model, DXA access, and the uptake of FRAX. Additional efforts are required to decrease the existing treatment gap estimating 75-90% of patients do not receive pharmacological intervention for secondary prevention, and the diagnosis rate is around 25%.

Methods: A selected panel of Turkish experts in fields related to osteoporosis was provided with a series of relevant questions to address prior to the multi-day conference. Within this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group, through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion until a consensus was achieved. Represented in the panel were a number of societies including The Turkish Osteoporosis Society, The Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism of Turkey (SEMT), and The Turkish Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

Results: Standardized general guidelines to identify OP and related fractures and at-risk population in Turkey, which will enable clinicians to accurately and effectively diagnose the disease, treat the appropriate patients with available pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments and decrease the burden of the disease.

Conclusions: This manuscript provides a review of the current state of OP and related fractures in Turkey. Moreover, this manuscript reviews current international guidelines and national studies and proposes a number of helpful country-specific classifications that can be used by healthcare providers caring for the at-risk population. Additionally, the panel proposes practical recommendations that should be implemented nationally in order to decrease the burden of OP and related fractures and effectively preventing the burden in future generations.

Keywords: Diagnosis of osteoporosis; FRAX; Fracture risk assessment; Treatment of osteoporosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Ten-year probability of a major fracture (in percent) at an intervention threshold and the upper and lower BMD assessment thresholds in women. Body mass index was set to 30.9 kg m−1
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cosman F, de Beur SJ, LeBoff MS, Lewiecki EM, Tanner B, Randall S, Lindsay R, National Osteoporosis Foundation Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014;25(10):2359–2381. doi: 10.1007/s00198-014-2794-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ferrari SL, Rizzoli R. Gene variants for osteoporosis and their pleiotropic effects in aging. Mol Asp Med. 2005;26:145–167. doi: 10.1016/j.mam.2005.01.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rizzoli R, Bonjour JP, Ferrari SL. Osteoporosis, genetics and hormones. J Mol Endocrinol. 2001;26:79–94. doi: 10.1677/jme.0.0260079. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Odén A, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, Kanis JA. Assessing the impact of osteoporosis on the burden of hip fractures. Calcif Tissue Int. 2013;92:42–49. doi: 10.1007/s00223-012-9666-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Van Balen R, Essink-Bot ML, Steyerberg E, Cools H, Habbema DF. Quality of life after hip fracture: a comparison of four health status measures in 208 patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(10):507–519. doi: 10.1080/0963828031000090443. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms