2017
DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12355
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prevention of osteoporotic refractures in regional Australia

Abstract: A rurally based nurse-led FLS was associated with modest improvement after MTF. Consideration should be given to ways to strengthen the model of care to improve outcomes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
32
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
32
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Berry et al [33] performed a simulation study comparing standard survival analysis versus a competing risk approach in a study of second hip fracture, indicating that standard survival analysis overestimated the 5-year risk of second hip fracture by 37% and the 10-year risk by 75% compared with competing risk estimates. Out of the 16 included studies, four reported a competing risk survival regression analysis [23,24,31,32] (Supplementary 5). Three studies [23,31,32] used the method of Fine and Gray [34], which deals with the competing risk of mortality by retaining participants in the risk set with a diminishing weight when they die, rather than simply censoring them at the time of death [31].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Berry et al [33] performed a simulation study comparing standard survival analysis versus a competing risk approach in a study of second hip fracture, indicating that standard survival analysis overestimated the 5-year risk of second hip fracture by 37% and the 10-year risk by 75% compared with competing risk estimates. Out of the 16 included studies, four reported a competing risk survival regression analysis [23,24,31,32] (Supplementary 5). Three studies [23,31,32] used the method of Fine and Gray [34], which deals with the competing risk of mortality by retaining participants in the risk set with a diminishing weight when they die, rather than simply censoring them at the time of death [31].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Twelve studies [1,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] compared the outcomes of FLS to historical data (post-FLS vs. pre-FLS). Two studies [30,31] compared the outcomes of the FLS with data from a hospital without FLS, and two other studies [12,32] performed both comparisons (pre-FLS vs. post-FLS, hospital with FLS vs. hospital without FLS).…”
Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“… Author (year) Study design Type of MoC Population and sample size ( n ) Follow-up months Delivery of MoC EPOC taxonomy Clinical outcomes Program reach and loss to follow-up Risk of Bias Frequency of contact Contact method Contact location Group vs individual care Delivery arrangement Implementation strategy Primary outcome? Fracture outcomes FLS Amphansap (2016) [37] Thailand Cohort study FLS type A >50 yr inpatient with MTF 75 12 More than once, but less than 3monthly Face to face Hospital Home Individual Packages of care Targeted at specific health conditions Fracture 0 (0%) MTF vs 36 (30%) in prior cohort, p< 0·001 Reach: not reported Loss to follow-up: intervention 15·7%; control not reported + Bachour (2017) [38] Lebanon Cohort study FLS type A >50 yr ED patient with MTF 250 24 Not reported Face to face Hospital Individual Packages of care Targeted at specific health conditions Fracture 8 (8·2%) total fractures vs 18 (18%) in prior cohort, p= 0·004 Reach: not reported Loss to follow-up: Intervention 81·7%; Control 23·1% + Davidson (2017) [39] Australia Cohort study FLS type C >45 yr inpatient with MTF 140 36 Once Not reported …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent FLS cohort study, significantly more deaths were observed within three years of initial fracture after fracture; but a higher rate of medication initiation/review was associated with a lower rate of re-fracture [ 15 ]. Current prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis mainly consist of bisphosphonates, hormone replacement therapy, denosumab, strontium ranelate, and selective estrogen receptor modulators [ 16 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%