nach oben

Osteoporosis International

Erschienen in:

03.06.2024 | Review

Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping review

verfasst von: Foziye Tahmasbi, Farahnaz Sadoughi, Abbas Sheikhtaheri, Mozhdeh Zabihiyeganeh, Farhad Ameri

Erschienen in: Osteoporosis International | Ausgabe 9/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Summary

This research conducts a comparative analysis and scoping review of 105 studies in the field of Fracture Liaison Service (FLS). The resulting two-dimensional framework represents a significant step toward FLS implementation.

Purpose

The primary goal is to review interventions in real world settings in order to provide the FLS framework that specifies the essential elements of its implementation and offers different perspectives on that.

Method

This study encompasses two phases: a comparative analysis of existing FLS models, including “Capture the Fracture,” “5IQ,” and “Ganda,” and a scoping review from 2012 to 2022 in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, and IEEE databases limited to publications in English.

Results

The resulting model of comparative analysis identifies patient identification, investigation, intervention and integration or continuity of care as the four main stages of FLS. Additionally, the elements of quality and information span across all stages. Following comparative analysis, the framework is designed to be used for content analysis of the included studies in the scoping review. The intersection of columns (Who, Where, When, What, How, Quality) with rows (Identification, Investigation, Intervention, and continuity of care) yields a set of questions, answered in tabular form based on the scoping review.

Conclusion

The framework offers potential benefits in facilitating the adoption of effective approaches for FLS implementation. It is recommended to undertake an in-depth review of each of these components in order to uncover novel and innovative approaches for improving their implementation.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Sánchez MA, Segura JE, Alajmo G, Nossa JM, Correa A, Leal E, Moscoso A, Pineda GA, Aya AC (2020) Implementation of a postfracture care program in a private hospital in Colombia. J Osteoporos. 2020:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8208397CrossRef

Åkesson KE, McGuigan FEA (2021) Closing the osteoporosis care gap. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 19(1):58–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-021-00608-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Osaki M, Okuda R, Saeki Y, Okano T, Tsuda K, Nakamura T, Morio Y, Nagashima H, Hagino H (2021) Efficiency of coordinator-based osteoporosis intervention in fragility fracture patients: a prospective randomized trial. Osteoporos Int 32(3):495–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05713-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Geiger I, Kammerlander C, Höfer C, Volland R, Trinemeier J, Henschelchen M et al (2021) Implementation of an integrated care programme to avoid fragility fractures of the hip in older adults in 18 Bavarian hospitals – study protocol for the cluster-randomised controlled fracture liaison service FLS-CARE. BMC Geriatr 21:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01966-1CrossRef

Chandran M, Mitchell PJ (2021) Development of the Asia Pacific Consortium on Osteoporosis (APCO) framework: clinical standards of care for the screening, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis in the Asia-Pacific region. In: Smith J (ed) The rise of modern genomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 1249–1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05742-0

Javaid MK, Kyer C, Mitchell PJ, Chana J, Moss C, Edwards MH et al (2015) Effective secondary fracture prevention: implementation of a global benchmarking of clinical quality using the IOF capture the FractureA (R) best practice framework tool. Osteoporos Int 26(11):2573–2578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3192-0CrossRefPubMed

Lüthje P, Nurmi-Lüthje I, Tavast N, Villikka A, Kataja M (2021) Evaluation of minimal fracture liaison service resource: costs and survival in secondary fracture prevention—a prospective one-year study in South-Finland. Aging Clin Exp Res 33(11):3015–3027. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-021-01826-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bernstein J, Weintraub S, Hume E, Neuman MD, Kates SL, Ahn J (2017) The new APGAR SCORE: a checklist to enhance quality of life in geriatric patients with hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99(14):e77. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.16.01149CrossRefPubMed

Fielding JW (1975) Pugh nail fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res (1976–2007) 106:107–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197501000-00015

10.

Jones AR, Herath M, Ebeling PR, Teede H, Vincent AJ (2021) Models of care for osteoporosis: a systematic scoping review of efficacy and implementation characteristics. eClinicalMedicine 38:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101022

11.

Bandara S, Lynch G, Cooke C, Varghese P, Ward N (2017) Using care bundles to improve surgical outcomes and reduce variation in care for fragility hip fracture patients. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 8(2):104–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458516681634CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Barton DW, Piple AS, Smith CT, Moskal SA, Carmouche JJ (2021) The clinical impact of fracture liaison services: a systematic review. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 12:2151459320979978. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151459320979978CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Ruggiero C, Zampi E, Rinonapoli G, Baroni M, Serra R, Zengarini E et al (2015) Fracture prevention service to bridge the osteoporosis care gap. Clin Interv Aging 10:1035–42. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S76695CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Amarowicz J, Czerwiński E (2015) Possibilities for implementing fracture liaison service in Poland in the light of a visit to Glasgow western infirmary. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 17(4):415–421. https://doi.org/10.5604/15093492.1173384CrossRefPubMed

15.

Skorupski N, Alexander IM (2013) Multidisciplinary osteoporosis management of post low-energy trauma hip-fracture patients. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 25(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-7599.12002CrossRefPubMed

16.

Fuggle NR, Kassim Javaid M, Fujita M, Halbout P, Dawson-Hughes B, Rizzoli R et al (2021) Fracture risk assessment and how to implement a fracture liaison service. In: Falaschi P, Marsh D (ed) Orthogeriatrics: the management of older patients with fragility fractures. Springer, pp 241–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48126-1_14

17.

Åkesson KE, Ganda K, Deignan C, Oates MK, Volpert A, Brooks K et al (2022) Post-fracture care programs for prevention of subsequent fragility fractures: a literature assessment of current trends. Osteoporos Int 33(8):1659–1676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-022-06358-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Nguyen MP, Gannon NP, Miller AN (2021) Osteoporotic fractures: what orthopaedic surgeons can do to prevent the next fall and the next fracture? J Orthop Trauma 35(Suppl 5):S45-s47. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002227CrossRefPubMed

19.

Luc M, Corriveau H, Boire G, Filiatrault J, Beaulieu MC, Dagenais P et al (2020) Implementing a fracture follow-up liaison service: perspective of key stakeholders. Rheumatol Int 40(4):607–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-019-04413-6CrossRefPubMed

20.

Wu CH, Chen CH, Chen PH, Yang JJ, Chang PC, Huang TC et al (2018) Identifying characteristics of an effective fracture liaison service: systematic literature review. Osteoporos Int 29(5):1023–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4370-zCrossRefPubMed

21.

González-Quevedo D, Pérez-del-Río V, Moriel-Garceso D, Fernández-Arroyabe N, García-Meléndez G, Montañez-Ruiz M et al (2022) A 2-year follow-up of a novel Fracture Liaison Service: can we reduce the mortality in elderly hip fracture patients? A prospective cohort study. Osteoporos Int. 33(8):1695–1702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-022-06298-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Ben-Natan MRNP, Heyman NMD, Israel JBMD (2014) Evaluation of osteoporosis educational program on elders who sustained an osteoporotic fracture. Int J Caring Sci 7(2):602–609

23.

Pape H-C, Bischoff-Ferrari HA (2017) How can we influence the incidence of secondary fragility fractures? A review on current approaches. Injury 48(Suppl 1):S24–S26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30394-7CrossRefPubMed

24.

Marsh D, Mitchell P, Falaschi P, Beaupre L, Magaziner J, Seymour H et al (2021) The multidisciplinary approach to fragility fractures around the world: an overview. In: Falaschi P, Marsh D (eds) Orthogeriatrics: the management of older patients with fragility fractures. Springer, pp. 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48126-1_1

25.

Hoang-Kim A, Kanengisser D (2020) Developing registries and effective care models for the management of hip fractures: aligning political, organizational drivers with clinical outcomes. Curr Osteoporos Rep 18(3):180–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-020-00576-6CrossRefPubMed

26.

Chow S (2017) Nurse practitioner fracture liaison role a concept analysis. Orthop Nurs 36(6):385–391. https://doi.org/10.1097/NOR.0000000000000413CrossRefPubMed

27.

Boudou L, Gerbay B, Chopin F, Ollagnier E, Collet P, Thomas T (2011) Management of osteoporosis in fracture liaison service associated with long-term adherence to treatment. Osteoporos Int 22(7):2099–2106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1445-6CrossRefPubMed

28.

Hagino H, Wada T (2019) Osteoporosis liaison service in Japan. Osteoporos Sarcopenia 5(3):65–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afos.2019.08.003CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Ragin CC (2014) Case-oriented comparative methods. In: The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press, pp 34–52

30.

Åkesson K, Marsh D, Mitchell PJ, McLellan AR, Stenmark J, Pierroz DD et al (2009) Capture the fracture: a best practice framework and global campaign to break the fragility fracture cycle. Osteoporos Int 24:2135–2152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-009-0928-zCrossRef

31.

ROS (2015) Effective secondary prevention of fragility fractures: clinical standards for fracture liaison services. National Osteoporosis Society. Available from: https://theros.org.uk/media/1eubz33w/ros-clinical-standards-for-fracture-liaison-services-august-2019.pdf

32.

Ganda K, Puech M, Chen JS, Speerin R, Bleasel J, Center JR, Eisman JA, March L, Seibel MJ (2013) Models of care for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 24(2):393–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-012-2182-xCrossRefPubMed

33.

Adick C (2018) Bereday and Hilker: origins of the ‘four steps of comparison’ model. Comp Educ 54(1):35–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2017.1392465CrossRef

34.

Adib Hajbaghery M, Mazhariazad F (2019) Nursing bachelor’s education program in Iran and UCLA: a comparative study. Mil Caring Sci 6(2):159–168. https://doi.org/10.29252/mcs.6.2.159

35.

Daudt HML, van Mossel C, Scott SJ (2013) Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med Res Methodol 13(1):48. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D et al (2018) PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 169(7):467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850CrossRefPubMed

37.

Institute JB (2023) The JBI scoping review resources. Joanna Briggs Institute. Available from: https://jbi.global/scoping-review-network/resources

38.

Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, Pollock D, Munn Z, Alexander L et al Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Implement 19(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000277

39.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 13(1):117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Hewitt-Taylor J (2001) Use of constant comparative analysis in qualitative research. Nurse Res 15(42):39–42. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns2001.07.15.42.39.c3052CrossRef

41.

Miller AN, Lake AF, Emory CL (2015) Establishing a fracture liaison service: an orthopaedic approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97(8):675–681. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00949CrossRefPubMed

42.

Pasquale MK, Sheer RL, Yehoshua A, McFadden A, Chines A, Caloyeras J (2021) Evaluation of an osteoporosis outreach program for men with a fragility fracture and their physicians. Med Care 59(2):148–154. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001459CrossRefPubMed

43.

Naranjo A, Aguado P, de Toro J, Toledo MD, González T, Rosas J et al (2021) Organisational and clinical approach to osteoporosis in rheumatology: OP-SER-excellence survey and consensus. Reumatol Clin (Engl Ed) 17(6):322–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reuma.2019.11.004CrossRefPubMed

44.

Dockery F, Glynn A, Franks K, Carey JJ, O’Gradaigh D, Kenny P et al (2022) Fracture liaison services in Ireland—how do we compare to international standards? Osteoporos Int 33(5):1089–1096. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-021-05974-2CrossRefPubMed

45.

Stolnicki B, Inacio AM, Tutiya KK, Vieira LFT, Javaid MK, Calo M (2022) How to initiate and develop Fracture Liaison Services (FLS). Recommendations from the IOF Capture the Fracture (R) FLS Mentors in Brazil. Arch Osteoporos 17(1):63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-022-01108-7

46.

Kendler DL, Adachi JD, Brown JP, Juby AG, Kovacs CS, Duperrouzel C et al (2021) A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces. Osteoporosis Int 32(1):123–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05796-6CrossRef

47.

El Miedany Y, Paruk F, Kalla A et al (2021) Consensus evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treat-to-target management of osteoporosis in Africa: an initiative by the African Society of Bone Health and Metabolic Bone Diseases. Arch Osteoporos 16(1):176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-01035-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

El Miedany Y, Abu-Zaid MH, El Gaafary M et al (2021) Egyptian consensus on treat-to-target approach for osteoporosis: a clinical practice guideline from the Egyptian Academy of bone health and metabolic bone diseases. ERAR 48(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43166-020-00056-9CrossRef

49.

Zachman JA (2003) The Zachman framework for enterprise architecture. Primer for Enterprise Engineering and Manufacturing. Zachman International

50.

Curtis JR, Silverman SL (2013) Commentary: The five ws of a fracture liaison service: Why, who, what, where, and how? In osteoporosis, we reap what we sow. Curr Osteoporos Rep 11(4):365–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-013-0177-9CrossRefPubMed

51.

Ane D, Knut H, Hege N, Toril Kristin K, Oda H, Fredrik Holten B, Mehl B, Johnsen E, Paulsen A (2023) Improving the quality of the fracture liaison service through the implementation of a structured health record. BMJ Open Qual 12(Suppl 2):e002275. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002275CrossRef

52.

Zhao W, Pu S, Jiang D (2020) A human resource allocation method for business processes using team faultlines. Appl Intell. 50(9):2887–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-01686-4CrossRef

53.

Javaid MK, Sami A, Lems W, Mitchell P, Thomas T, Singer A, Speerin R, Fujita M, Pierroz D, Akesson K, Halbout P, Ferrari S, Cooper C (2020) A patient-level key performance indicator set to measure the effectiveness of fracture liaison services and guide quality improvement: a position paper of the IOF Capture the Fracture Working Group, National Osteoporosis Foundation and Fragility Fracture Network. Osteoporos Int 31(7):1193–1204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05377-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Sanli I, van Helden SH, ten Broeke RHM, Geusens P, Van den Bergh JPW, Brink PRG, Poeze M (2019) The role of the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) in subsequent fracture prevention in the extreme elderly. Aging Clin Exp Res. 31(8):1105–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-018-1054-2CrossRefPubMed

55.

Diez-Perez A, Adachi Jd, Agnusdei D, Bilezikian JP, Compston JE, Cummings SR, Eastell R, Ericsen EF, Gonzalez-Macias J, Liberman UA, Wahl DA, Seeman E, Kanis JA, Cooper C (2012) Treatment failure in osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 23(12):2769–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-012-2093-8CrossRefPubMed

56.

Kaplan HC, Provost LP, Froehle CM, Margolis PA (2012) The Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ): building a theory of context in healthcare quality improvement. BMJ Qual Saf. 21(1):13–20. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000010CrossRefPubMed

57.

Ziemann A, Brown L, Sadler E, Ocloo J, Boaz A, Sandall J (2019) Influence of external contextual factors on the implementation of health and social care interventions into practice within or across countries-a protocol for a ‘best fit’ framework synthesis. Syst Rev. 8(1):258. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1180-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Cornelissen D, Boonen A, Evers S, van den Bergh JP, Bours S, Wyers CE, Kuijk SV, Oostwaard MV, Weijden TVD, Hiligsmann (2021) Improvement of osteoporosis Care Organized by Nurses: ICON study - Protocol of a quasi-experimental study to assess the (cost)-effectiveness of combining a decision aid with motivational interviewing for improving medication persistence in patients with a recent fracture being treated at the fracture liaison service. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 22(1):913. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04743-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Miller KL, Steffen MJ, McCoy KD, Cannon G, Seaman AT, Anderson ZL, Patel S, Green J, Wardyn S, Solimeo SL (2021) Delivering fracture prevention services to rural US veterans through telemedicine: a process evaluation. Arch Osteoporos. 16(1):27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-00882-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping review
verfasst von: Foziye Tahmasbi
Farahnaz Sadoughi
Abbas Sheikhtaheri
Mozhdeh Zabihiyeganeh
Farhad Ameri
Publikationsdatum: 03.06.2024
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: Osteoporosis International / Ausgabe 9/2024
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-024-07091-8

Race-specific FRAX models are evidence-based and support equitable care: a response to the ASBMR Task Force report on Clinical Algorithms for Fracture Risk

Position Paper

Association between socioeconomic deprivation and bone health status in the UK biobank cohort participants

Open Access
Original Article

Latent metabolic bone disease, skeletal dysplasia and other conditions related to low bone formation among 38 patients with subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a retrospective observational study

Open Access
Original Article

Examining treatment targets and equity in bone-active medication use within secondary fracture prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Review

The hip fracture incidence in the high-risk area Oslo continues to decline

Open Access
Original Article

The effect of romosozumab on bone mineral density depending on prior treatment: a prospective, multicentre cohort study in Switzerland

Open Access
Original Article

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. Zur Fortbildung und Wissenserweiterung, verfasst und geprüft von Expertinnen und Experten der Gesellschaft für Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie (AGA).

Jetzt entdecken!

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Viele Versäumnisse bei Psoriasis-Arthritis

17.04.2025
Psoriasis-Arthritis
Nachrichten

Menschen mit Psoriasis-Arthritis (PsA) müssen länger auf die Diagnose warten und werden zögerlicher behandelt als an rheumatoider Arthritis (RA) Erkrankte. Diese Defizite hat eine Untersuchung in Großbritannien aufgedeckt.

Yoga gegen Kniearthrose nicht schlechter als Krafttraining

15.04.2025
Gonarthrose
Nachrichten

Menschen mit Gonarthrose profitieren von Yogaübungen nicht weniger als von gezielten Kräftigungsübungen für die lädierten Knie. In einer Vergleichsstudie haben sich für Yogis und Yoginis sogar einige Vorteile ergeben.

Muskelrelaxanzien wohl nur bei akuten Kreuzschmerzen hilfreich

14.04.2025
Rückenschmerzen
Nachrichten

Bei akuten Rückenschmerzen können Muskelrelaxanzien, eventuell in Kombination mit NSAR, zur Schmerzlinderung beitragen. Wegen der Nebenwirkungen wird jedoch empfohlen, die Medikamente nur über wenige Tage einzusetzen.

Wie bereits der virtuelle "Blick ins Grüne" Schmerzen lindern kann

07.04.2025
Nichtmedikamentöse Schmerztherapie
Nachrichten

Dass der Blick in die Natur Menschen dazu bringen kann, Schmerzen weniger stark zu empfinden, konnte bereits mehrfach nachgewiesen werden. Jetzt ließen sich in einer experimentellen Studie sogar allein durch das Betrachten von Videos mit Naturszenen analgetische Effekte erzeugen.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Developing fracture liaison service framework based on comparative analysis and scoping review