Article

Correlation between patient recall of bone densitometry results and subsequent treatment adherence.

University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Osteoporosis International (Impact Factor: 4.17). 09/2005; 16(9):1156-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-004-1818-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Treatment of osteoporosis is often inadequate. One reason can be insufficient patient education following diagnostic bone densitometry (DXA). Therefore, we studied how patients are informed and treated following their first DXA. Individuals who had DXA at a rural hospital in Wisconsin were surveyed with a questionnaire regarding their post-test education and prescribed treatment. Their DXA results and the specialty of their clinician were also recorded. Eighty percent of the 1,014 participants were informed of their results. Of the 341 participants who had normal bone mineral density (BMD), 63% reported correct results, while only 31% of the 309 who had osteopenia and 50% of the 364 who had osteoporosis reported correct results. Accuracy in reporting was not affected by the patients' age or the specialty of their clinicians. Following DXA, 339 patients (33%) were started on medications; 86% of those remained on some prescribed therapy for osteoporosis, but 140 (41%) did not continue the initial medication. Reasons for discontinuation included side effects (48%) and cost (26%). Patients with low BMD who correctly reported their results were more likely to have received a medication and to continue to take it ( p <0.0001). Calcium supplements were recommended to 65% of those not taking calcium prior to DXA. Internists were more likely than family practitioners to recommend calcium, and their patients reported better medication adherence, as did those with osteoporosis compared with osteopenia. We conclude that, while most participants are informed of the results of their DXAs, the retained information may not be accurate. Correct understanding of DXA results may lead to higher treatment rates and better adherence to treatment among patients with low BMD.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
49 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We investigated the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) Canada calibration and discrimination according to income quintile in 51,327 Canadian women, with and without a competing mortality framework. Our data show that, under a competing mortality framework, FRAX provides robust fracture prediction and calibration regardless of socioeconomic status (SES). FRAX® predicts 10-year fracture risk. Social factors may independently affect fracture risk. We investigated FRAX calibration and discrimination according to SES. Women aged ≥50 years with baseline femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) were identified from the Manitoba Bone Density Program, Canada (n = 51,327), 1996-2011. Mean household income, extracted from 2006 census files, was categorized into quintiles. Ten-year fracture probabilities were calculated using FRAX Canada. Incident non-traumatic fractures were studied in relation to income quintile in adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. We compared observed versus predicted fractures with and without a competing mortality framework. During mean 6.2 ± 3.7 years of follow up, there were 6,392 deaths, 3,723 women with ≥1 major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and 1,027 with hip fractures. Lower income was associated with higher risk for death, MOF, and hip fracture in adjusted models (all p < 0.005). More women in income quintile 1 (lowest) versus quintile 5 experienced death (19 vs. 8 %), MOF (10 vs. 6 %), or hip fracture (3.0 vs. 1.3 %) (all p ≤ 0.001). Adjustment for competing mortality mitigated the effect of SES on FRAX calibration, and good calibration was observed. FRAX provided good fracture discrimination for MOF and hip fracture within each income quintile (all p < 0.001). Area under the curve was slightly lower for income quintiles 1 versus 5 for FRAX with BMD to predict MOF (0.68, 95 % CI 0.66-0.70 vs. 0.71, 95 % CI 0.69-0.74) and hip fracture (0.79, 95 % CI 0.76-0.81 vs. 0.87, 95 % CI 0.84-0.89). Increased fracture risk in individuals of lower income is offset by increased mortality. Under a competing mortality framework, FRAX provides robust fracture prediction and calibration regardless of SES.
    Osteoporosis International 11/2013; 25(1). · 4.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To use a mixed-methods approach to develop a letter that can be used to notify patients of their bone mineral density (BMD) results by mail that may activate patients in their bone-related health care.
    Patient Preference and Adherence 01/2014; 8:827-41. · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Osteoporosis is a major health concern, estimated to affect millions worldwide. Bone mineral density (BMD) assessment is not practical for many large-scale epidemiological studies resulting in the reliance of self-report methods to ascertain diagnostic information. The aim of the study was to assess the validity of self-reported diagnosis of osteoporosis in a population-based study. This study examined data collected from 906 men and 843 women participating in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporosis was self-reported and compared against results of BMD scans of the hip and spine. Validity was examined by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and kappa statistic. Osteoporosis was self-reported by 118 (6.7%) participants and identified using BMD results for 64 (3.7%) participants. Specificity and negative predictive value were good (95.1% and 96.0%, respectively), whereas sensitivity and positive predictive value were poor (35.9% and 31.4%, respectively). The overall level of agreement (kappa) was 0.29. The results changed only slightly when we included participants with osteopenia and adult fracture as osteoporotic. Reliance on self-report methods to ascertain osteoporosis status is not recommended.
    Journal of Clinical Densitometry 06/2014; · 1.60 Impact Factor