Publications (2)3.83 Total impact
-
Article: Comparison of the proportion of patients potentially treated with an anti-osteoporotic drug using the current criteria of the Belgian national social security and the new suggested FRAX(®) criteria.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the number of anti-osteoporosis treatments that would be reimbursed by the Belgian social security if either FRAX(®) or the current criteria were used to determine access to reimbursement. This is a retrospective study based on data from 1,000 women randomly selected from an outpatient hospital specialized in bone metabolism in Belgium. Proportions of potentially refunded treatments between FRAX(®) and current criteria were compared. Out of the 1,000 women files, 890 have sufficient information to assess FRAX(®). In Belgium, current criteria include a bone mineral density (BMD) T score below -2.5 at the lumbar spine, the femoral neck or the total hip and/or at least a prevalent vertebral fracture. Using these criteria, 167 women (18.8 %) would have access to reimbursement. Using the criteria based on the validated Belgian FRAX(®) tool, only 116 women (13.0 %) would have access to reimbursement, meaning that access to reimbursement based on FRAX(®) criteria would reduce by 30 % the anti-osteoporosis drug expenses covered by the national social security. Interestingly, only 65 women out of the 116 (56.0 %) selected with the FRAX(®) criteria were also selected with the current criteria of the national social security. A substantial proportion of individuals that would potentially receive a reimbursement for their treatment using the FRAX(®) criteria do not have access to any refund for their treatment with the current criteria. Since patients identified with the FRAX(®) tool are those with the highest risk profile for future fractures, reappraisals of treatment reimbursement guidelines are expected in Belgium.Rheumatology International 07/2012; · 1.88 Impact Factor -
Article: Effect of collagen hydrolysate in articular pain: a 6-month randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of a food supplement made of collagen hydrolysate 1200 mg/day versus placebo during 6 months, in subjects with joint pain at the lower or upper limbs or at the lumbar spine. Comparative double-blind randomized multicenter study in parallel groups. 200 patients of both genders of at least 50 years old with joint pain assessed as ≥30 mm on a visual analogical scale (VAS). Collagen hydrolysate 1200 mg/day or placebo during 6 months. Comparison of the percentage of clinical responder between the active collagen hydrolysate group and the placebo group after 6 months of study. A responder subject was defined as a subject experiencing a clinically significant improvement (i.e. by 20% or more) in the most painful joint using the VAS score. All analyses were performed using an intent-to-treat procedure. At 6 months, the proportion of clinical responders to the treatment, according to VAS scores, was significantly higher in the collagen hydrolysate (CH) group 51.6%, compared to the placebo group 36.5% (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between groups at 3 months (44.1% vs. 39.6%, p=0.53). No significant difference in terms of security and tolerability was observed between the two groups. This study suggests that collagen hydrolysate 1200 mg/day could increase the number of clinical responders (i.e. improvement of at least 20% on the VAS) compared to placebo. More studies are needed to confirm the clinical interest of this food supplement.Complementary therapies in medicine 06/2012; 20(3):124-30. · 1.95 Impact Factor
