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
. 2021 Jul 14:38:101022.
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101022. eCollection 2021 Aug.

Models of care for osteoporosis: A systematic scoping review of efficacy and implementation characteristics

Affiliations

Models of care for osteoporosis: A systematic scoping review of efficacy and implementation characteristics

Alicia R Jones et al. EClinicalMedicine. .

Abstract

Background: Osteoporosis affects over half of adults over 50 years worldwide. With an ageing population, osteoporosis, fractures and their associated costs are increasing. Unfortunately, despite effective therapies, many with osteoporosis remain undiagnosed and untreated. Models of care (MoC) to improve outcomes include fracture liaison services, screening, education, and exercise programs, however efficacy for these is mixed. The aim of this study is to summarise MoC in osteoporosis and describe implementation characteristics and evidence for improving outcomes.

Methods: This systematic scoping review identified articles via Ovid Medline and Embase, published in English between 01/01/2009 and 15/06/2021, describing MoC for adults aged ≥18 years with, or at risk of, osteoporosis and / or health professionals caring for this group. All included at least one of clinical, consumer or clinician outcomes, with fractures and bone mineral density (BMD) change the primary clinical outcomes. Exclusion criteria were studies assessing pharmaceuticals or procedures without other interventions, or insufficient operational details. All study designs were included, with no comparator necessary. Title and abstract were reviewed by two reviewers. Full text review and data extraction was performed by these reviewers for 20% of article and, thereafter by a single author. As the review was predominantly descriptive, no comparator statistics were used.

Findings: 314 articles were identified describing 289 MoC with fracture liaison services (n=89) and education programs (n=86) predominating. The population had prior fragility fracture in 77 studies, the median (IQR) patient number was 210 (87, 667) and the median (IQR) follow-up duration for outcome assessment was 12 (6, 12·5) months. Fracture reduction was reported by 65 studies, with 16 (37%) graded as high quality, and 19 / 47 studies with a comparator group found a reduction in fractures. BMD change was reported by 73 studies, with 41 finding improved BMD. Implementation characteristics including reach, fidelity and loss to follow-up were under-reported, and consumer and clinician perspectives rare.

Interpretation: This comprehensive review of MoC for osteoporosis demonstrated inconsistent evidence for improving outcomes despite similar types of models. Future studies should include implementation outcomes, consumer and clinician perspectives, and fracture or BMD outcomes with sufficient duration of follow-up. Authors should consider pragmatic trial designs and co-design with clinicians and consumers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

AJ is supported by a 10.13039/501100000925National Health and Medical Research Council postgraduate research scholarship (Grant No. 1169192) and has received a travel grant from the Australian and New Zealand Bone and Mineral Society. MH is supported by a 10.13039/501100000925National Health and Medical Research Council postgraduate research scholarship (Grant No. 2002671). PE has received institutional grants or contracts from Amgen, the National Health and Medical Research Council, Alexion and Eli-Lilly; payments to institution from Amgen, is a participant on Celltrion Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board, and has a leadership or fiduciary role on the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research executive, International Osteoporosis Foundation board and Healthy Bones Australia board. HT is the recipient of a National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship Grant. AV reports no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
Study selection.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wright N.C., Looker A.C., Saag K.G. The recent prevalence of osteoporosis and low bone mass in the United States based on bone mineral density at the femoral neck or lumbar spine. J Bone Miner Res. 2014;29(11):2520–2526. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Watts JJ, Abimanyi-Ochom J, Sanders KM, Osteoporosis costing all Australians a new burden of disease analysis-2012 to 2022. Melbourne, Vic: Osteoporosis Australia; 2013.
    1. Warriner A.H., Patkar N.M., Curtis J.R. Which fractures are most attributable to osteoporosis? J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):46–53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Amin S., Achenbach S.J., Atkinson E.J., Khosla S., Melton L.J., 3rd. Trends in fracture incidence: a population-based study over 20 years. J Bone Miner Res. 2014;29(3):581–589. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borgström F., Karlsson L., Ortsäter G. Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):59. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types