» Articles » PMID: 29747415

Patient-Related Factors Associated with Adherence to Recommendations Made by a Fracture Liaison Service: A Mixed-Method Prospective Study

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2018 May 12
PMID 29747415
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) has been calculated to be a cost-effective model of care for patients with fragility fracture (FF). Cost-effectiveness can be achieved when adherence to bone health recommendations from FLS staff is high. This prospective study combined participants’ telephone longitudinal survey data (intervention group, = 354) and interviews with 16 individuals from FLS in three health regions of the province of Quebec (Canada). Participants were recruited between January 2013 and April 2015. Regression models were fit to examine the relationship between participant-related factors and adherence at 12 months to osteoporosis medication, vitamin D supplementation, and participation in physical activity. Participants acknowledging FF as a consequence of osteoporosis were more likely to adhere to medication (odds ratio (OR) 2.5; = 0.001) and vitamin D supplementation (OR 2.3; = 0.01). Paradoxically, the same participants were less prone to engage in physical activity (OR 0.5, = 0.01). Qualitative interviews suggested that feedback from FLS coordinators helped participants understand the underlying cause of their FF. This study highlighted the key roles of FLS staff in helping patients to recognize FF as a sign of underlying bone disease and encouraging adherence to care recommendations.

Citing Articles

Three-year follow-up of a novel orthopedic ward fracture liaison services (OWFLS) model.

Cai X, Ying Y, Zhang C, Xu R, Xu B, Xia D J Int Med Res. 2024; 52(4):3000605241245280.

PMID: 38635894 PMC: 11032053. DOI: 10.1177/03000605241245280.


Executive summary: Italian guidelines for diagnosis, risk stratification, and care continuity of fragility fractures 2021.

Corrao G, Biffi A, Porcu G, Ronco R, Adami G, Alvaro R Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1137671.

PMID: 37143730 PMC: 10151776. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1137671.


Long-term persistence of treatment after hip fracture in a fracture liaison service.

Naranjo A, Molina A, Quevedo A, Rubino F, Sanchez-Alonso F, Rodriguez-Lozano C Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):9373.

PMID: 35672434 PMC: 9174234. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-13465-x.


Attitudes toward bone health among rural-dwelling veterans identified as at risk of fracture: a qualitative analysis.

Van Tiem J, Steffen M, Seaman A, Miller K, Wardyn S, Richards C JBMR Plus. 2021; 5(6):e10501.

PMID: 34189387 PMC: 8216131. DOI: 10.1002/jbm4.10501.


Preventing hip fractures with multidisciplinary teams: a Canadian perspective.

Sanders E, Dobransky J, Cheaitani L, Harris N, Liew A, Papp S Can J Surg. 2021; 64(3):E310-E316.

PMID: 34038059 PMC: 8327994. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.014219.


References
1.
Cosman F, de Beur S, LeBoff M, Lewiecki E, Tanner B, Randall S . Clinician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014; 25(10):2359-81. PMC: 4176573. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-014-2794-2. View

2.
Baert V, Gorus E, Mets T, Bautmans I . Motivators and barriers for physical activity in older adults with osteoporosis. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2015; 38(3):105-14. DOI: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000035. View

3.
Papaioannou A, Morin S, Cheung A, Atkinson S, Brown J, Feldman S . 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary. CMAJ. 2010; 182(17):1864-73. PMC: 2988535. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.100771. View

4.
Kanis J, Oden A, Johnell O, Jonsson B, De Laet C, Dawson A . The burden of osteoporotic fractures: a method for setting intervention thresholds. Osteoporos Int. 2001; 12(5):417-27. DOI: 10.1007/s001980170112. View

5.
Leslie W, Giangregorio L, Yogendran M, Azimaee M, Morin S, Metge C . A population-based analysis of the post-fracture care gap 1996-2008: the situation is not improving. Osteoporos Int. 2011; 23(5):1623-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-011-1630-1. View