首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Disparities in osteoporosis treatments
Authors:Z Liu  J Weaver  A de Papp  Z Li  J Martin  K Allen  S Hui  E A Imel
Institution:1.Department of Biostatistics,Indiana University Schools of Medicine and Public Health,Indianapolis,USA;2.Merck & Co,New Jersey,USA;3.Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine,Durham,USA;4.Regenstrief Institute,Indianapolis,USA;5.Department of Medicine,Indiana University School of Medicine,Indianapolis,USA
Abstract:

Summary

Osteoporosis treatment rates within 2 years following an index event (fragility fracture, osteoporotic bone mineral density (BMD) T-score, or osteoporosis ICD-9 codes) were determined from 2005 to 2011. Most patients were not treated. Fracture patients had the lowest treatment rate. Low treatment rates also occurred in patients that were male, black, or had non-commercial insurance.

Introduction

Clinical recognition of osteoporosis (osteoporotic BMD, assignment of an ICD-9 code, or the occurrence of fragility fractures) provides opportunities to treat patients at risk for future fracture.

Methods

A cohort of 36,965 patients was identified from 2005 to 2011 in the Indiana Health Information Exchange, with index events after age 50 of either non-traumatic fractures, an osteoporosis ICD-9 code, or a BMD T-score?≤??2.5. Patients with osteoporosis treatment in the preceding year were excluded. Medication records during the ensuing 2 years were extracted to identify osteoporosis treatments, demographics, comorbidities, and co-medications. Predictors of treatment were evaluated in a multivariable logistic regression model.

Results

The cohort was 78 % female, 11 % black, 91 % urban-dwelling, and 53 % commercially insured. The index events were as follows: osteoporosis diagnosis (47 % of patients), fragility fracture (44 %), and osteoporotic T-scores (9 %). Within 2 years after the index event, 23.3 % received osteoporosis medications (of which, 82.2 % were oral bisphosphonates). Treatment rates were higher after osteoporosis diagnosis codes (29.3 %) or osteoporotic T-score (53.9 %) than after fracture index events (10.5 %) (p?<?0.001). Age had an inverted U-shaped effect for women with highest odds around 60–65 years. Women (OR 1.86) and non-black patients (OR 1.52) were more likely to be treated (p?<?0.001). Patients with public (versus commercial) insurance (OR 0.86, p?<?0.001) or chronic comorbidities (ORs about 0.7–0.9, p?<?0.001) were less likely to be treated.

Conclusion

Most osteoporosis treatment candidates remained untreated. Men, black patients, and patients with fracture or chronic comorbidities were less likely to receive treatment, representing disparity in the recognition and treatment of osteoporosis.
Keywords:
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号