Introduction: A fracture liaison service (FLS) is a coordinated system of care that streamlines osteoporosis management in the orthopaedic setting and can serve as an effective form of secondary preventative care in these patients. The present work reviews the available evidence regarding the impact of fracture liaison services on clinical outcomes. Methods: The literature was reviewed for studies reporting changes in the rates of bone mineral density scanning (DXA), antiresorptive therapy, new minimum trauma fractures, and mortality between cohorts with access to an FLS or not. Studies including intention to treat level data were retained. A Medline search for “fracture liaison” OR “secondary fracture prevention” produced 146 results, 98 were excluded based on the abstract, 38 were excluded based on full-text review. Ten level III studies encompassing 48,045 patients were included, of which 5 studies encompassing 7,086 were analyzed. Odds-ratios for DXA and anti-osteoporosis pharmacotherapy rates were calculated from data. Fixed and random effects analyses were performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results: Four studies reported, on average, a 6-fold improvement in DXA scanning rates (Figure 1). Six studies reported, on average, a 3-fold improvement in antiresorptive therapy rates (Figure 2). Four large studies reported significant reductions in the rate of new fractures using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models at 12 months (HR = 0.84, 0.95), 24 months (HR = 0.44, 0.65), and 36 months (HR = 0.67). Five large studies reported mortality improvements using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models at 12 months (HR = 0.88, 0.84, 0.81) and 24 months (HR = 0.65, 0.67). Conclusions: The findings suggest that fracture liaison services improve rates of DXA scanning and antiresorptive therapy as well as reductions in the rates of new fractures and mortality among patients seen following minimum trauma fractures across many time points.

Background: Osteoporosis is often undiagnosed until patients experience fragility fractures. Pelvic fractures are common but underappreciated sentinel fractures. Screening patients with a pelvic fracture for osteoporosis may provide an opportunity to initiate appropriate treatments such as anti-osteoporosis therapy to prevent additional fractures. Methods: This retrospective cohort review examined the management of osteoporosis after pelvic fractures at a large tertiary care center without an established secondary fracture prevention program. Data were extracted from electronic medical records of all new patients with a pelvic fracture who were ≥50 years of age from this center and its affiliated community hospitals from 2008 to 2014. Outcome measures included the initiation of anti-osteoporosis therapy before the fracture, within the year following the fracture, >1 year following the fracture, or never and new osteoporotic fractures within 2 years after a pelvic fracture. Results: From 2008 to 2014, 947 patients presented with pelvic fractures. Of these patients, 27.1% (257 patients) were taking anti-osteoporosis medications before the fracture. Four percent of treatment-naïve patients began anti-osteoporosis therapy within 1 year of fracture, with 1.2% (11 patients) starting after 1 year. Of the treatment-naïve patients, 92.3% (637 patients) were never prescribed anti-osteoporosis therapy. Treatment rates were consistent over time. Within 2 years, 41.0% (388 patients) developed fragility fractures at secondary sites: 12.0% (114 patients) experienced a hip fracture, and 16.4% (155 patients) experienced a vertebral fracture. Conclusions: Osteoporosis screening and initiation of secondary fracture prevention after a pelvic fracture were inadequate in the study population. Of the patients in this study, 909 (96.0%) never underwent a dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan during the study period. Of the 690 treatment-naïve patients, 637 (92.3%) were never administered anti-osteoporosis medications. Within 2 years, 41.0% of all patients developed additional osteoporotic fractures. This study demonstrates an opportunity to improve bone health by screening for and treating osteoporosis in patients with a pelvic fragility fracture. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

No abstract