Secondary fracture prevention in hip fracture patients requires cooperation from general practitioners

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11110%2F17%3A10364283" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11110/17:10364283 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00216208:11120/17:43915166 RIV/00064173:_____/17:N0000097 RIV/00064211:_____/17:W0000022 RIV/00023728:_____/17:N0000083

Result on the web

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0346-z" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0346-z</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0346-z" target="_blank" >10.1007/s11657-017-0346-z</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Secondary fracture prevention in hip fracture patients requires cooperation from general practitioners

Original language description

Summary: Despite individual recommendations on osteoporosis management in patients after hip fracture surgery, addressed by orthopedic surgeons to Czech general practitioners, the patients remained undiagnosed and untreated because of provider-level barriers to post-fracture secondary prevention. Purpose: The goal of the study was to assess whether an individual recommendation on osteoporosis treatment addressed to a hip fracture patient&apos;s GP would lead to better osteoporosis management. Methods: Two groups of patients who suffered hip fractures and were treated at the Orthopedic Department were evaluated. In 111 patients, general recommendations on osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention were provided in a discharge report addressed to the GP. In the second group, 96 patients were provided individually with a detailed written set of recommendations on osteoporosis examination, treatment, and fracture prevention, which was also provided in the discharge report. A questionnaire to assess the provided care was mailed to the patients 5.3 +/- 1.2 months of discharge. Those patients who did not return the questionnaires were contacted by phone. Results: The questionnaires were received from 44% and 49% of patients from the general and detailed recommendation groups, respectively. Along with the phone call, we were able to contact 78 (70.3%) and 68 (70.8%) patients from the general and detailed recommendation groups, respectively. GPs secured osteoporosis evaluation in 14.6% of the patients. Calcium supplementation and vitamin D supplementation were newly provided in 42.7 and 36.4% of the patients, respectively. Anti-resorptive therapy was newly provided in 8.3% of the patients. No significant differences between the groups were observed in osteoporosis evaluation, calcium and vitamin D supplementation, and anti-osteoporosis treatments.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30211 - Orthopaedics

Project

—

Continuities

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Publication year

2017

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Archives of Osteoporosis

ISSN

1862-3522

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

12

Issue of the periodical within the volume

1

Country of publishing house

GB - UNITED KINGDOM

Number of pages

6

Pages from-to

—

UT code for WoS article

000411041700001

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85027717653