暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Following an index femoral fragility fracture, patients are at risk of a subsequent peri-implant fracture. Management of these injuries are further complicated by patient factors and multi-institutional care. This study quantifies such events and compare rate of identification between in-system and out-of-system patients.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective chart review of index operative femoral fragility fractures at a level I trauma center from January 1, 2005 to January 1, 2018 identified 840 patients with twenty-two subsequent peri-implant fractures. Kaplan Meier survival analyses assessed associations between patient and injury characteristics with the subsequent fracture while accounting for differential follow-up. Cumulative incidence curves were reported, and Cox regression analyses estimated hazard ratios for statistically significant associations. In-system and out-of-system patients were compared with absolute rate of identifying subsequent fracture and follow-up time.
UNASSIGNED: Cumulative incidence of subsequent fracture was 2.1 % at 2 years, 3.4 % at 4 years, and 4.6 % at 6 years. The index fracture pattern (intertrochanteric vs other) was associated with a cumulative incidence of subsequent peri-implant fracture (0.8 % at 2 years, 1.4 % at 4 years, and 2.7 % at 6 years for intertrochanteric fractures vs 3.4 % at 2 years, 5.3 % at 4 years, and 6.4 % at 6 years for non-intertrochanteric fractures), p = 0.029. Follow-up was shorter for out-of-system patients (median 6 versus 28 months, p < 0.001), and only 1 of 348 out-of-system patients (0.3 %) vs. 21 of 492 in-system patients (4.3 %) were diagnosed with a subsequent peri-implant fracture (p < 0.001). There was no association of subsequent peri-implant fracture with patient demographics or comorbidity burden.
UNASSIGNED: Cumulative incidence of subsequent peri-implant fracture was higher for non-intertrochanteric (femoral neck, shaft and distal femur) fractures than intertrochanteric fractures. Out-of-system patients had shorter follow-up and were less likely to be diagnosed with a subsequent peri-implant fracture, indicating ascertainment bias and underscoring the importance of accounting for loss to follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: Therapeutic Level III.

Introduction: Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) pose a considerable healthcare burden and are linked to elevated morbidity and mortality. Despite available anti-osteoporotic treatments (AOTs), guideline adherence is lacking. This study aims to evaluate subsequent hip fracture incidence after index VCF and to elucidate AOT prescribing patterns in VCF patients, further assessing the impact of surgical interventions on these patterns. Materials and Methods: Patients with index VCFs between 2010 and 2021 were identified using the PearlDiver database. Diagnostic and procedural data were recorded using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9, ICD-10) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Patients under age 50 and follow-up

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the lower trunk are among the most common fractures occurring in the elderly. Super elderly individuals (i.e., those 80 years of age and older) represent a growing segment of the population and are especially prone to these fractures. The contemporary epidemiology of lower trunk fractures in the super elderly population is incompletely described in the literature.
METHODS: This descriptive epidemiology study used the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to examine the incidence and recent trends of lower trunk fractures (i.e., fractures of the hip, pelvis, and lumbar spine) occurring among super elderly individuals in the United States (US) from 2011 to 2020. Annual, overall, and age-/sex-specific incidence rates (IRs) were analyzed. Average annual percent change (AAPC) estimates were calculated to indicate the magnitude/direction of trends in annual injury rates.
RESULTS: An estimated N=1,226,160 super elderly patients sustained lower trunk fractures over the 10-year study period for an overall IR of 100.2 per 10,000 person-years at-risk (PYR). Hip fractures accounted for the largest percentage of cases (IR=71.7 PYR), followed by lumbar spine fractures (IR=14.7), and pelvic fractures (IR=14.3). The incidence of lower trunk fractures among super elderly females (IR=121.5 PYR) was significantly greater than that of males (IR=65.7 PYR). The incidence of lower trunk fractures among nonagenarians and centenarians was significantly higher than that of octogenarians. Accounting for population growth yielded a significantly increasing annual incidence of lower trunk fractures in super elderly patients over the study period from 86.7 PYR in 2011 to 107.2 PYR in 2020 (AAPC=2.7, p<0.001). The annual incidence of both pelvic (AAPC=5.8) and lumbar spine (AAPC=6.9) fractures increased at a significantly higher rate than that of hip fractures (AAPC=1.4).
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the annual incidence of lower trunk fractures in the oldest cohort of patients in the US (80+ years of age) increased significantly during the recent decade from 2011 to 2020, with pelvic and lumbar fractures in particular becoming increasingly common. Increased incidence rates highlight the need for future research aimed at optimizing outcomes and quality of life in this frail and ever-growing segment of the population.

BACKGROUND: Fragility fractures occur due to low energy mechanisms and result in significant morbidity and mortality. This study reviews the implementation of a fragility fracture program at a level I trauma center. In this pathway, trauma surgery provides clearance followed by admission and management with medical service and orthopedic consultation for injuries which meet fragility fracture criteria.
METHODS: This pathway, implemented in July 2021, includes patients with isolated fractures secondary to a low energy mechanism. We compared cohorts 2-ys before (PRE) and after (POS) pathway implementation. Demographics (age, sex, fracture location, injury severity score, American Society of Anesthesiologists score) and outcome data were collected and analyzed using between-subjects analyses. Measured outcomes included deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, hospital mortality, disposition to hospice, nonoperative rate, unplanned intensive care unit admission, time to surgery (TTS), and length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS: The study included n = 1137 patients (n = 564 PRE and n = 573 POS). POS patients had a higher injury severity score (P = 0.003) and different fracture location (P = 0.017), but no other demographics were different. Trauma admission decreased after implementation (P < 0.001; PRE: 21.5%, POS: 1.8%) with no differences in outcomes except increases in LOS (P < 0.001; PRE: 114 h, POS: 124 h) and TTS (P < 0.001; PRE: 15 h, POS: 18 h).
CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity and mortality did not correlate with pathway implementation; however, TTS and LOS increased. Although TTS increased, it remained under the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgery 48-h recommendation. The TTS and LOS increases were potentially from COVID-19 or cohort demographic differences. Decreased trauma as admitting service demonstrates pathway adherence. These findings highlight the need for investigation to better understand fragility fracture pathways.

BACKGROUND: Underdiagnosis or undertreatment of osteoporosis consequently impacts individual morbidity and mortality, as well as on healthcare systems and communities as a whole. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard method for identifying osteoporosis, however, opportunistic CT screening is capable of precisely estimating bone mineral density (BMD) in abdominopelvic imaging with no additional cost, radiation exposure or inconvenience to patients. This study uses opportunistic CT screening to determine the prevalence of osteoporosis and anatomic distribution patterns in patients presenting with lower extremity fractures at our institution.
OBJECTIVE: Trauma patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) are more likely to present with peri-articular versus shaft fractures.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 721 patients presenting as trauma activations to the emergency department (ED) of a Level 1 Trauma Center with lower extremity fractures. Patients were excluded if under the age of 18 or lacking a CT scan upon arrival in the ED. Hounsfield Units (HU) were measured at the L1 vertebral level on CT scans to determine bone mineral density. Values of ≤100 HU were consistent with osteoporosis, whereas 101-150 HU were consistent with osteopenia.
RESULTS: The final cohort included 416 patients, with mean age of 49 ± 21 years. Average bone density was 203.9 ± 73.4 HU. 15.9% of patients were diagnosed as osteopenic and 9.9% as osteoporotic. 64.2% of fractures were peri-articular, 25.7% were shaft, and 10.1% were a combination. Peri-articular fractures were significantly more likely to have lower average BMD than shaft fractures (189 ± 74.7 HU vs. 230.6 ± 66.1 HU, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates a significant relationship between low bone mineral density and lower extremity fracture pattern, however, likely influenced by other factors such as sex. Opportunistic CT screening for osteoporosis in trauma settings provides ample opportunity for early detection of low BMD and implementation of highly effective lifestyle modification and pharmacotherapy intervention. Reduction in the overall incidence of peri-articular fracture with widespread adoption of opportunistic CT screening may lessen the morbidity, mortality, and total cost currently afflicting patients, healthcare systems, and communities.
METHODS: III, therapeutic.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are common fragility fractures. Patients who undergo surgical treatment for their initial OVCFs warrant particular attention because there is an elevated risk of subsequent vertebral fractures and other types of fragility fractures. However, the optimal osteoporosis treatment for this specific patient group is less investigated.
OBJECTIVE: This study compares the risk of subsequent osteoporotic fractures and mortality rate for patients who are initiated with denosumab and bisphosphonates and determines the effect of adherence to treatment.
METHODS: Retrospective nationwide cohort study PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 2,858 patients who had surgically-managed osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.
METHODS: The risk of osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, nonvertebral fractures and death.
METHODS: This is a retrospective nationwide cohort study that uses the National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients aged ≥50 years who were admitted for surgical interventions for OVCF between 2012 and 2016 and subsequently received denosumab or bisphosphonates for one year were included. Patients were stratified according to their antiosteoporosis medications and adherence to treatment. A multivariable, time-varying Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the risk of osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, nonvertebral fractures and death.
RESULTS: A total of 2,858 patients were included in this study: 1,123 patients in the denosumab group and 1,735 patients in the bisphosphonates group. Compared to persistent denosumab users, the nonpersistent denosumab users, persistent bisphosphonate users and nonpersistent bisphosphonate users had a greater risk of osteoporotic fractures, with respective hazard ratios of 1.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.32), 1.74 (95% CI, 1.25-2.42) and 1.53 (95% CI, 1.14-2.06). If osteoporotic fractures were divided into nonvertebral and vertebral fractures, none of the groups exhibited an increased risk of vertebral fractures compared to persistent denosumab users, with an HR of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.54-1.88) for nonpersistent denosumab users, 1.64 (95% CI: 0.96-2.81) for persistent bisphosphonate users and 1.52 (95% CI: 0.95-2.43) for nonpersistent bisphosphonate users. However, there was a significantly greater risk of nonvertebral fracture, with respective hazard ratios of 2.04 (95% CI, 1.33-3.11), 1.80 (95% CI, 1.18-2.76) and 1.56 (95% CI, 1.06-2.27) for nonpersistent denosumab users, persistent bisphosphonate users and nonpersistent users. Noteworthy, nonpersistent denosumab users exhibited a significantly greater risk of mortality than persistent denosumab users, with a hazard ratio of 3.12 (95% CI, 2.22-4.38).
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of patients with OVCFs who require hospitalization and surgical intervention, those who receive ongoing denosumab treatment exhibit less risk of developing subsequent osteoporotic fractures than those who receive bisphosphonates or nonpersistent denosumab treatment. However, discontinuation of denosumab is associated with a significantly increased risk of subsequent fractures and mortality. Therefore, adherence to the treatment is crucial for patients who are initiated with denosumab.

Fracture Liaison Service is a coordinator-based model effective in addressing the fragility fracture care gap. This study found that the service was feasible in Malaysia and could improve the delivery of secondary fracture prevention. Local adaptations and reactive responses addressed challenges, enhancing feasibility.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a Fracture Liaison Service in Malaysia and to benchmark our service against the International Osteoporosis Foundation Best Practice Framework.
METHODS: This feasibility study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Malaysia from March 2021 to March 2022. Patients aged ≥ 50 years admitted with fragility fractures were recruited. Excluded were those with poor prognosis or transferred out from the hospital during admission. Patients were screened, assessed, and followed up at months 4 and 12 post-fracture presentations. Data was collected using Microsoft Excel and the REDCap database. The feasibility of the Fracture Liaison Service was evaluated using the typology of feasibility.
RESULTS: A total of 140 patients (female (93/140, 66.4%), median age 77 (IQR 72, 83), hip fractures (100/140, 65.8%)) were recruited into the Fracture Liaison Service. The recruitment rate was (140/215, 65.1%), as some patients were \"missed\" due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The completion rate was high (101/114, 88.6%). Among those indicated for antiosteoporosis medication, 82/100 (82%) were initiated on treatment. Various \"Best Practice Standards,\" such as patient evaluation (140/140, 100%), fall prevention (130/140, 92.9%), and medication review standards (15/15, 100%) were high. Complicated referral pathways, inexperienced staff, lack of resources, and communication issues were some of the barriers identified while implementing the Fracture Liaison Service. Challenges were overcome by modifying the service workflow and coordinating with different departments.
CONCLUSIONS: The Fracture Liaison Service was found to be feasible in Malaysia. It demonstrated promise in improving bone health management; however, several changes were needed to adapt the service to suit our environment.

A fracture liaison service is a systems-level multidisciplinary approach designed to reduce subsequent fracture risk in patients who recently sustained fragility fractures. It is estimated that one in three women and one in five men over the age of 50 years old have osteoporosis. Nonetheless, only 9 to 20% of patients who sustain an initial fragility fracture eventually receive any osteoporosis treatment. With the aim of preventing subsequent fractures, a fracture liaison service (FLS) works through identifying patients presenting with fragility fractures to the hospital and providing them with easier access to osteoporosis care through referrals for bone health and fracture risk assessment and recommendation or initiation of osteoporosis treatment. Currently, there are four major types of FLS models ranging from services that only identify at-risk patients and inform and educate the patient but take no further part in communicating their findings to other stakeholders in patients\' care, to services that identify, investigate, and initiate treatment at the other end of the spectrum. In this article, we review the benefits, challenges, and outcomes of FLS in the American healthcare system with further exploration of the roles each member of the multidisciplinary team can play in improving patients\' bone health.

Patients who sustain a hip fracture are known to be at imminent refracture risk. Their complex multidisciplinary rehabilitation needs to include falls prevention and anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) to prevent such fractures. This study aimed to determine which hospital-level organizational factors predict prescription of post-hip fracture AOM and refracture risk. A cohort of 178 757 patients aged ≥60 yr who sustained a hip fracture in England and Wales (2016-2019) was examined and followed for 1 yr. Patient-level hospital admission datasets from 172 hospitals, the National Hip Fracture Database, and mortality data were linked to 71 metrics extracted from 18 hospital-level organizational reports. Multilevel models determined organizational factors, independent of patient case-mix, associated with (1) AOM prescription and (2) refracture (by ICD10 coding). Patients were mean (SD) 82.7 (8.6) yr old, 71% female, with 18% admitted from care homes. Overall, 101 735 (57%) were prescribed AOM during admission, while 50 354 (28%) died during 1-yr follow-up, 12 240 (7%) refractured. Twelve organizational factors were associated with AOM prescription, for example, orthogeriatrician-led care compared to traditional care models (odds ratio [OR] 4.65 [95% CI, 2.25-9.59]); AOM was 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%) more likely to be prescribed in hospitals providing routine bone health assessment to all patients. Refracture occurred at median 126 d (IQR 59-234). Eight organizational factors were associated with refracture risk; hospitals providing orthogeriatrician assessment to all patients within 72 h of admission had an 18% (95% CI, 2%-31%) lower refracture risk, weekend physiotherapy provision had an 8% (95% CI, 3%-14%) lower risk, and where occupational therapists attended clinical governance meetings, a 7% (95% CI, 2%-12%) lower risk. Delays initiating post-discharge community rehabilitation were associated with a 15% (95% CI, 3%-29%) greater refracture risk. These novel, national findings highlight the importance of orthogeriatrician, physiotherapist, and occupational therapist involvement in secondary fracture prevention post hip fracture; notably, fracture risk reductions were seen within 12 mo of hip fracture.
Patients who have broken (fractured) a hip are at risk of having another fracture soon after. They have complex needs to avoid more fractures, which include being prescribed bone-strengthening medicines and taking measures to prevent falls. This study looked at which of the measurements, that describe how well a hospital is organized, are associated with whether bone-strengthening medicine is prescribed and the chance of having another fracture. We used data from 178 757 patients aged over 60 yr who had a hip fracture at 172 English and Welsh hospitals, linked to their hospital records, and other datasets that describe hospital services. Overall, 57% of patients were prescribed bone-strengthening medicines, and 7% went on to have another fracture. Bone-strengthening medicines were more likely to be prescribed in hospitals where patient care was led by a consultant specializing in the care of older people with fractures (called orthogeriatricians) and in hospitals which routinely checked patients’ bone health. Patients attending hospitals that provided orthogeriatrician assessment to all patients within 72 h of being admitted, physiotherapy services at the weekend, or where occupational therapists attended meetings aimed at improving hospital services had a lower chance of having another fracture.