Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
    • Podcast: NC Health Policy Forum
    • Upcoming Scientific Articles
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Subscribers
  • About Us
    • About the North Carolina Medical Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • RSS
  • Other Publications
    • North Carolina Medical Journal

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
North Carolina Medical Journal
  • Other Publications
    • North Carolina Medical Journal
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
North Carolina Medical Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
    • Podcast: NC Health Policy Forum
    • Upcoming Scientific Articles
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Subscribers
  • About Us
    • About the North Carolina Medical Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • RSS
  • Follow ncmj on Twitter
  • Visit ncmj on Facebook
Research ArticlePolicy Forum

Challenges in the Screening and Management of Osteoporosis

Lisa A. LaVallee, Mollie Ashe Scott and Stephen D. Hulkower
North Carolina Medical Journal November 2016, 77 (6) 416-419; DOI: https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.77.6.416
Lisa A. LaVallee
director, family medicine residency program, Mountain Area Health Education Center, Asheville, North Carolina; associate professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: lisa.ray@mahec.net
Mollie Ashe Scott
regional associate dean, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Asheville, North Carolina; clinical associate professor, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen D. Hulkower
director, Division of Family Medicine, Mountain Area Health Education Center, Asheville, North Carolina; associate professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Osteoporosis imposes a significant burden of morbidity, mortality, and cost on patients and the health care system. Compliance with existing screening and treatment recommendations is low. There are multiple barriers to treatment including complexity of medical management, cost of medications, real and perceived side effects of medications, and nonadherence.

Osteoporosis is a generalized skeletal disorder characterized by decreased bone density and deterioration of bone quality, which often leads to fragility fractures. Osteoporosis can be diagnosed based on low bone density as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), but low bone density is not required for the diagnosis. A fragility fracture, regardless of DXA results, necessitates the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Low bone mass (osteopenia) is defined as a T-score between −1.0 and −2.49 by DXA. A DXA T-score of −2.5 or lower (determined by lowest calculation from lumbar spine, femoral neck, or total femur T-score) is diagnostic of osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis is a common disease, affecting more than 10 million adults 50 years or older in the United States [1]. An estimate of patients who have low bone mass, which places them at increased risk for fractures, is more than 3 times that number—more than half of the men and women in the United States older than 50 years [1]. Of white women older than 50 years, 4 in 10 will experience an osteoporotic fracture in their lifetime [2]; such fractures frequently result in chronic pain, disfigurement, height loss, impairment in activities of daily living, loss of independence, and lower quality of life. The 1-year mortality rate for patients following a hip fracture is estimated to be 14%–36% [2, 3]. Women with a vertebral fracture have a 1.2-fold greater age-adjusted mortality rate compared with women without fractures [4]. A 2005 estimate calculated the direct cost of fragility fractures to be $19 billion annually [5].

Screening for Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a silent disease. The first symptom of osteoporosis is either pain related to a fracture or height loss related to vertebral compression fractures. The prevalence of the disease, lack of early symptoms, and availability of effective treatments make screening for osteoporosis critical to the management of this disease [6]. In 2011, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended osteoporosis screening for women aged 65 years or older and for women over 50 years whose fracture risk is equal to or greater than that of a 65-year-old white woman who has no additional risk factors [7].

The FRAX risk assessment tool can be used to identify postmenopausal women younger than 65 years who would benefit from bone mineral density (BMD) testing [8]. The FRAX tool uses updated, evidence-based estimates of absolute fracture risk and was created to quantitatively integrate multiple factors into a clinically useful risk prediction model. The FRAX tool should be used following BMD testing to identify patients with osteopenia who would benefit from pharmacologic therapy. Based on the FRAX tool, a 65-year-old woman with no other risk factors for osteoporosis has a 10-year risk for any osteoporotic fracture of 9.3%. A risk greater than this in a woman younger than 65 years is an indication to screen for osteoporosis. Risk factors that should prompt risk stratification in women younger than 65 years include current smoking, daily alcohol use of 3 or more drinks per day, body mass index less than 21 kg/m2, history of parental fracture, rheumatoid arthritis, and steroid use for a duration of over 3 months.

Despite clearly established benefits of treatment, screening rates remain low [6]; one study reported that only 27% of eligible women aged 66–70 years received DXA screening [9]. Screening rates for men are much lower in part because screening recommendations for this population are less clear. The USPSTF gives an “I” recommendation for screening men, meaning that current evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against screening [7], while the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) recommends screening all men over age 70 years as well as some men above age 50 years, based on their risk factor profiles [10]. Screening for men is further complicated by the lack of Medicare reimbursement for routine osteoporosis screening in men.

Management of Osteoporosis

There are several challenges associated with the management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fractures. Because of the prevalence of this disease and patients' limited access to specialty care, primary care physicians must be familiar with management options for osteoporosis. Primary care settings are well suited for offering systematic screening for osteoporosis, providing efficient and cost effective treatment, and coordinating care transitions from the hospital after a fragility fracture. However, determining who needs treatment and for how long is an increasingly complicated decision. Barriers to patient engagement include a lack of understanding of the disease, skepticism about treating a silent disease to prevent a possible future outcome, concerns about reported side effects of medications, and the cost of available treatments. These challenges lead to high rates of patient refusal of treatment and non-adherence with prescribed medications.

Another challenge is the difficulty of interpreting the DXA result and recommending a course of treatment. The NOF recommends that postmenopausal women and men over 50 years should be counseled on their risk of osteoporosis and related fractures, evaluated for secondary causes, advised on dietary intake of calcium and vitamin D, advised to participate in regular weight-bearing and muscle strengthening exercise, assessed for falls risk, and counseled on tobacco cessation and moderate use of alcohol [10, 11]. This counseling, particularly for falls assessment, is time consuming and detailed.

Pharmacologic treatment is recommended if the patient is diagnosed with osteoporosis based on a low T-score or the presence of a fragility fracture. Based on cost-effectiveness analyses, pharmacotherapy is also recommended for the treatment of osteopenia when the patient has a 10-year hip fracture probability of 3% or higher, or if he or she has a major osteoporosis-related fracture probability of 20% or higher based on the FRAX tool [2, 9, 10].

The oral bisphosphonate drug alendronate has the strongest supporting evidence for the prevention of hip, vertebral, and non-vertebral fractures [12]. While many patients are good candidates for oral bisphosphonates, consideration must be given to the patient's renal function and serum calcium levels, and the patient must be able to swallow, follow complex directions, and adhere to an intermittent medication regimen. Regularly discontinuing bisphosphonate for brief periods (“drug holidays”) has been studied in lower-risk patients and can be used to minimize overall medication burden, decrease cost, and minimize side effects that are associated with length of therapy [13]. However, not all patients treated with bisphosphonates are candidates for drug holidays. If a patient has a high risk for vertebral fracture, a drug holiday may be inadvisable. Also, any temporary discontinuation of therapy introduces risk of failure to follow-up. Patients should continue with calcium, vitamin D, and nonpharmacologic treatment during a bisphosphonate holiday.

For patients who are not candidates for oral bisphosphonates—based on their inability to swallow, sit upright, or follow the regimen—additional treatment options include intravenous bisphosphonates, rank ligand inhibitors (denusomab), or teriparatide. However, these therapies are more expensive than oral bisphosphonates and require additional office visits to administer the drug (denusomab and intravenous bisphosphonates) or to teach patients appropriate self-injection technique (teriparatide). Prior authorization is often required, and not all insurance companies cover second-line agents. These logistical challenges might be difficult for the primary care physician to manage efficiently without team members such as nurses, care coordinators, and pharmacists.

Patients are less likely to perceive osteoporosis as a significant cause of morbidity and mortality compared to other chronic diseases. Clinicians must therefore educate patients about the risks of fractures and their sequelae before a meaningful and balanced discussion of treatment options can be undertaken. Even after such a discussion, patients often make the choice to “wait and see,” to treat with diet and exercise alone, and/or to refuse medications. Overall, adherence and persistence with bisphosphonates are low, increasing the cost of health care due to preventable fractures [14-16].

In our experience, many patients believe that they can manage osteoporosis with diet and exercise alone, and dissuading them from this approach may be difficult. Older patients may already have a significant medication burden and may exhibit a healthy skepticism about adding another medication. They may thus miss an opportunity to utilize a therapy that decreases their risk of fracture and improves their quality of life. In our practice, identifying and framing the conversation around common goals of maintaining quality of life and preserving independence carries greater weight with patients than does quoting fracture and mortality rates.

The available medications for the treatment of osteoporosis have strong therapeutic value. In women at a high risk for fracture, the number needed to treat (NNT) with alendronate is 22 to prevent a hip fracture and 20 to prevent a vertebral fracture [17, 18]. However, rare side effects of bisphosphonates have received significant media exposure, leading to significant fears among patients. The estimated incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients taking oral bisphosphonates is 0.7 per 100,000 patient-years [19], and the risk of atypical femoral shaft fractures is 0.13% in the subsequent year for women with at least 5 years of treatment [20]. It is a time-intensive task to present patients with a balanced picture of the risks associated with the medications compared to the often unspoken and greater risk of doing nothing.

Medication costs can also present a significant burden. Oral bisphosphonates are not cost prohibitive and are available generically. However, patients who cannot take oral bisphosphonates must consider a group of expensive alternatives that may place them in the Medicare Part D donut hole, in which case they must pay out of pocket. In some cases, these drugs may also require a cumbersome prior authorization process.

There are also several nonpharmacologic interventions for patients with osteoporosis that should be pursued aggressively: smoking cessation, weight-bearing exercise, Tai Chi, and moderation of alcohol consumption [10, 11]. Attention should also be given to maintaining adequate calcium and vitamin D levels and discontinuing medications that increase risk for falls. The NOF recommends 1,200 mg per day of calcium from all sources (supplements, vitamins, and diet) for optimal bone health [11], and the American Geriatrics Society recommends 4,000 IU of vitamin D in patients older than 65 years to decrease the risk of falls [21]. Published by the American Geriatrics Society in 2015, the Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults is an important resource that identifies medications that increase the risk of falls [22].

Population Management

Systematic population management is needed to adequately screen for and treat osteoporosis. This need is especially apparent in the management of patients following a fracture. Patients who have already had a fracture are at extremely high risk of repeat fracture, and rates of follow-up care are reported to be only 1%–25% [1, 8, 14]. Fewer than 25% of women receive a DXA scan or a prescription for bisphosphonate after a fragility fracture [23, 24]. The post-fracture population can be lost to primary care follow-up because patients often receive care for their fracture in the hospital, in a specialist's office, or in a long-term care facility.

A fracture liaison service (FLS) is a new model of care transitions for patients with recent fractures. An FLS coordinates care to ensure that patients receive optimal medical care after a fracture; use of this model has been shown to improve the quality of care delivered [11, 23] and to reduce subsequent fractures, with an NNT of 20 [24]. In order to be successful, an FLS requires local hospital and physician champions, often in many specialties, to coordinate their efforts. The NOF offers training programs for institutions wishing to develop an FLS.

Conclusion

Osteoporosis management is challenging. As our population ages, the prevalence of this disease is predicted to grow 50% by 2025, which would translate into 3 million fractures annually and $25.3 billion each year in direct and indirect costs [5]. The scope of the disease necessitates sophisticated understanding of screening and treatment guidelines and equally sophisticated population management to deliver coordinated services. Effective education of the public is also needed to communicate the benefits of treatment and the risks of forgoing treatment. Improved screening for and treatment of osteoporosis in North Carolina is an important goal that will require attention to all of these factors.

Acknowledgments

Potential conflicts of interest. All authors have no relevant conflicts of interest.

  • ©2016 by the North Carolina Institute of Medicine and The Duke Endowment. All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Looker AC,
    2. Melton LJ 3rd.,
    3. Harris TB,
    4. Borrud LG,
    5. Shepherd JA
    Prevalence and trends in low femur bone density among older US adults: NHANES 2005–2006 compared with NHANES III. J Bone Miner Res. 2010;25(1):64-71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Office of the Surgeon General
    Bone Health and Osteoporosis: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2004:1-404
  3. ↵
    1. Miyamoto RG,
    2. Kaplan KM,
    3. Levine BR,
    4. Egol KA,
    5. Zuckerman JD
    Surgical management of hip fractures: an evidence-based review of the literature. I: femoral neck fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16(10):596-607.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Kado DM,
    2. Browner WS,
    3. Palmero L,
    4. Nevitt MC,
    5. Genant HK,
    6. Cummings SR
    Study of osteoporotic fractures research group. Vertebral fractures and mortality in older women: a prospective study. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(11):1215-1220.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Burge R,
    2. Dawson-Hughes B,
    3. Solomon DH,
    4. Wong JB,
    5. King A,
    6. Tosteson A
    Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025. J Bone Miner Res. 2007;22(3):465-475.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Black DM,
    2. Cummings SR,
    3. Karpf DB, et al.
    Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group. Lancet. 1996;348(9041):1535-1541.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
    Screening for osteoporosis: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154(5):356-364.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Altkorn D,
    2. Cifu AS
    Screening for osteoporosis. JAMA. 2015;313(14):1467-1468.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Dell R,
    2. Greene D
    Is osteoporosis disease management cost effective? Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2010;8(1):49-55.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Cosman F,
    2. de Beur SJ,
    3. LeBoff MS, et al., National Osteoporosis Foundation
    Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014;25(10):2359-2381.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    Management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: 2010 position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2010;17(1):25-54; quiz 55-56.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Wells GA,
    2. Cranney A,
    3. Peterson J, et al.
    Alendronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(1):CD001155.
  13. ↵
    1. Black DM,
    2. Schwartz AV,
    3. Ensrud KE, et al., FLEX Research Group
    Effects of continuing or stopping alendronate after 5 years of treatment: the Fracture Intervention Trial Long-term Extension (FLEX): a randomized trial. JAMA. 2006;296(24):2927-2938.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Downey TW,
    2. Foltz SH,
    3. Boccuzzi SJ,
    4. Omar MA,
    5. Kahler KH
    Adherence and persistence associated with the pharmacologic treatment of osteoporosis in a managed care setting. South Med J. 2006;99(6):570-575.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Tomková S,
    2. Telepková D,
    3. Vanuga P, et al.
    Therapeutic adherence to osteoporosis treatment. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;52(8):663-668.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Chodick G,
    2. Moser SS,
    3. Goldshtein I
    Non-adherence with bisphosphonates among patients with osteoporosis: impact on fracture risk and healthcare cost. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016;16(3):359-370.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Ringe JD,
    2. Doherty JG
    Absolute risk reduction in osteoporosis: assessing treatment efficacy by number needed to treat. Rheumatol Int. 2010;30(7):863-869.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Winzenberg T,
    2. Jones G
    When do bisphosphonates make the most sense? J Fam Pract. 2011;60(1):18-28.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Advisory Task Force on Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws,
    2. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
    American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(3):369-376.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Park-Wyllie LY,
    2. Mamdani MM,
    3. Juurlink DN, et al.
    Bisphosphonate use and the risk of subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures in older women. JAMA. 2011;305(8):783-789.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. American Geriatrics Society Workgroup on Vitamin D Supplementation in Older Adults
    Recommendations abstracted from the American Geriatrics Society Consensus Statement on vitamin D for Prevention of Falls and Their Consequences. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(1):147-152.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. American Geriatrics Society 2015 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel
    American Geriatrics Society 2015 updated Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;63(11):2227-2246.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Bukata SV,
    2. DiGiovanni BF,
    3. Friedman SM, et al.
    A guide to improving the care of patients with fragility fractures. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2011;2(1):5-37.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    1. Nakayama A,
    2. Major G,
    3. Holliday E,
    4. Attia J,
    5. Bogduk N
    Evidence of effectiveness of a fracture liaison service to reduce the re-fracture rate. Osteoporos Int. 2016;27(3):873-879.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

North Carolina Medical Journal: 77 (6)
North Carolina Medical Journal
Vol. 77, Issue 6
November-December 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on North Carolina Medical Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Challenges in the Screening and Management of Osteoporosis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from North Carolina Medical Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the North Carolina Medical Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 7 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Challenges in the Screening and Management of Osteoporosis
Lisa A. LaVallee, Mollie Ashe Scott, Stephen D. Hulkower
North Carolina Medical Journal Nov 2016, 77 (6) 416-419; DOI: 10.18043/ncm.77.6.416

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Challenges in the Screening and Management of Osteoporosis
Lisa A. LaVallee, Mollie Ashe Scott, Stephen D. Hulkower
North Carolina Medical Journal Nov 2016, 77 (6) 416-419; DOI: 10.18043/ncm.77.6.416
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Screening for Osteoporosis
    • Management of Osteoporosis
    • Population Management
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Creating a Better State of Health for Women
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Policy Forum

  • Breaking the Cycle
  • Breaking the Cycle
  • From Here to There—With a Spring in Our Steps
Show more Policy Forum

INVITED COMMENTARIES AND SIDEBARS

  • Sidebar: Community-driven Approaches to Preventing Overdoses Among American Indians
  • Sidebar: History Shaping the Future: How History Influences Health in North Carolina Native American Communities
  • Sidebar: Impact of Racial Misclassification of Health Data on American Indians in North Carolina
Show more INVITED COMMENTARIES AND SIDEBARS

Similar Articles

About & Contact

  • About the NCMJ
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback

Info for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers

Articles & Alerts

  • Archive
  • Current Issue
  • Get Alerts
  • Upcoming Articles

Additional Content

  • Current NCIOM Task Forces
  • NC Health Data & Resources
  • NCIOM Blog
North Carolina Medical Journal

ISSN: 0029-2559

© 2022 North Carolina Medical Journal

Powered by HighWire