Aubry-Rozier Bérengère, Stoll Delphine, Gonzalez Rodriguez Elena, Hans Didier, Prudent Veronique, Seuret Ariane, Farron Alain, Lamy Olivier
Centre of bone diseases, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Orthopaedic Unit, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Swiss Med Wkly. 2018 Jan 4;148:w14579. doi: 10.4414/smw.2018.14579. eCollection 2018.
In 2008, the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland) initiated a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS). All patients hospitalised for a low trauma fracture are identified by the FLS. Inpatients then choose to be managed by either the FLS team or their general practitioner (GP). In this study we compared the management between the FLS team and the GP in terms of diagnosis of osteoporosis, treatment, refracture rates and mortality after FLS recording. Results are compared with the management of osteoporosis before the creation of the FLS, as reported in the survey study Osteocare. A total of 606 patients were included (80% women); 55% chose management by the FLS and 45% their GP. The mean age was 78.5, and hip was the main fracture site (44%). The percentage of patients having dual X-ray absorptiometry to diagnose osteoporosis was significantly higher in the FLS group than the GP group (72 vs 26.5%, p <0.01). This percentage was 31.4% in the Osteocare study. Overall, 50.3% of patients in the FLS group had osteoporosis versus 57.5% in the GP group (p <0.05). This percentage was 46.0% in the Osteocare study. Use of osteoporosis medication was higher in the FLS group (FLS 100% of the patients, GP 44.1%, p <0.001) and had increased since the Osteocare study (21.6%). One-year nonvertebral refracture rate was higher in GP group than in the FLS patients (5.1 vs 3.0%, p <0.05), whereas more vertebral fractures were identified in the FLS group, owing to protocol-driven regular clinical and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) evaluations (number of evaluations 8 vs 0, p <0.01). Unadjusted mortality was higher in GP group than in the FLS group at one and five years (6.93 vs 2.11% and 33.58 vs. 15.96%, p <0.04). After adjustment by age and fracture site, these results were not significant. With FLS management, diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis were more frequent than with GP management; new nonvertebral fractures were less frequent. Moreover, both forms of management had increased relative to rates reported in a 2004-2006 nationwide survey Osteocare, before FLS creation.
2008年,瑞士洛桑沃州大学医院(CHUV)启动了骨折联络服务(FLS)。所有因低创伤骨折住院的患者均由FLS识别。住院患者随后可选择由FLS团队或其全科医生(GP)进行管理。在本研究中,我们比较了FLS团队和GP在骨质疏松症诊断、治疗、再骨折率以及FLS记录后的死亡率方面的管理情况。研究结果与FLS设立之前一项名为Osteocare的调查研究中所报告的骨质疏松症管理情况进行了比较。总共纳入了606例患者(80%为女性);55%的患者选择由FLS管理,45%选择由其GP管理。平均年龄为78.5岁,髋部是主要骨折部位(44%)。FLS组中通过双能X线吸收法诊断骨质疏松症的患者百分比显著高于GP组(72%对26.5%,p<0.01)。在Osteocare研究中,这一百分比为31.4%。总体而言,FLS组中50.3%的患者患有骨质疏松症,而GP组为57.5%(p<0.05)。在Osteocare研究中,这一百分比为46.0%。FLS组中骨质疏松症药物的使用比例更高(FLS组为100%的患者,GP组为44.1%,p<0.001),并且自Osteocare研究以来有所增加(21.6%)。GP组的一年非椎体再骨折率高于FLS组患者(5.1%对3.0%,p<0.05), 而由于方案驱动的定期临床和椎体骨折评估(VFA),FLS组中发现了更多的椎体骨折(评估次数8次对0次,p<0.01)。在1年和5年时,未调整的死亡率GP组高于FLS组(6.93%对2.11%以及33.58%对15.96%,p<0.04)。在按年龄和骨折部位进行调整后,这些结果并不显著。与GP管理相比,FLS管理下骨质疏松症的诊断和治疗更为频繁;新的非椎体骨折较少见。此外,与FLS设立之前2004 - 2006年全国性调查Osteocare中报告的比率相比,两种管理方式下这些指标均有所增加。