Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patients undergoing surgical treatment for low-energy distal radius fractures are more likely to receive a referral and participate in a fracture liaison service program

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Osteoporosis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Patients often do not receive osteoporosis screening after a low-energy distal radius fracture (DRF). The effect of osteoporosis on the healing of DRFs remains a debate, and it is unclear if surgical treatment of this injury affects the referral and participation rates in a fracture liaison service (FLS) program. The purpose of this study is to report on a large cohort of low-energy DRFs and identify demographic, clinical, and treatment factors that affect referral and participation rates in an FLS program.

Methods

A retrospective review identified patients over 50 years old who sustained a low-energy DRF between 2013 and 2018. Patients with high-energy or unknown injury mechanisms were excluded. The primary outcome was the effect of DRF surgical treatment on referral and participation rates in an FLS program. Secondary outcomes included patient demographic and clinical characteristic effects on referral and participation rates in an FLS program.

Results

In total, 950 patients met inclusion criteria. Two hundred thirty patients (24.2%) were referred and 149 (15.7%) participated in the FLS program. Patients who underwent surgery were more likely to be referred to the FLS (OR 1.893, CI 1.403–2.555, p < 0.001) and participate in the FLS program (OR 2.47, CI 1.723–3.542, p < 0.001) compared to patients who received non-operative treatment of their DRF.

Conclusions

Patients who undergo surgical treatment of a low-energy DRF are more likely to be referred and participate in a FLS program. Further study is needed to identify why surgical treatment may affect referral and participation rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (2017) Osteoporosis: assessing the risk of fragility fracture. Osteoporosis: assessing the risk of fragility fracture

  2. Kessous R, Weintraub AY, Mattan Y et al (2014) Improving compliance to osteoporosis workup and treatment in postmenopausal patients after a distal radius fracture. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 53:206–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TJOG.2014.04.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sarfani S, Scrabeck T, Kearns AE et al (2014) Clinical efficacy of a fragility care program in distal radius fracture patients. J Hand Surg 39:664–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHSA.2014.01.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Øyen J, Rohde GE, Hochberg M et al (2010) Low-energy distal radius fractures in middle-aged and elderly women-seasonal variations, prevalence of osteoporosis, and associates with fractures. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 21:1247–1255. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-009-1065-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Øyen J, Brudvik C, Gjesdal CG et al (2011) Osteoporosis as a risk factor for distal radial fractures: a case-control study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:348–356. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. (2005) Leadership in orthopaedics: taking a stand to own the bone. American Orthopaedic Association position paper. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1389–1391. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00449

  7. Baba T, Hagino H, Nonomiya H et al (2015) Inadequate management for secondary fracture prevention in patients with distal radius fracture by trauma surgeons. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 26:1959–1963. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-015-3103-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Khan SA, de Geus C, Holroyd B, Russell AS (2001) Osteoporosis follow-up after wrist fractures following minor trauma. Arch Intern Med 161:1309–1312. https://doi.org/10.1001/ARCHINTE.161.10.1309

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Harper CM, Fitzpatrick SK, Zurakowski D, Rozental TD (2014) Distal radial fractures in older men. A missed opportunity? J Bone Joint Surg Am 96:1820–1827. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.01497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tulipan J, Jones CM, Ilyas AM The effect of osteoporosis on healing of distal radius fragility fractures. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2015.06.012

  11. Ganda K, Puech M, Chen JS et al (2013) Models of care for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 24:393–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-012-2090-Y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Antwi E, Groenwold RHH, Browne JL et al (2017) Development and validation of a prediction model for gestational hypertension in a Ghanaian cohort. BMJ Open 7:12670. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJOPEN-2016-012670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ahmed LA, Center JR, Bjørnerem Å et al (2013) Progressively increasing fracture risk with advancing age after initial incident fragility fracture: the Tromsø study. J Bone Mineral Res: Off J Am Soc Bone Mineral Res 28:2214–2221. https://doi.org/10.1002/JBMR.1952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haentjens P, Autier P, Collins J et al (2003) Colles fracture, spine fracture, and subsequent risk of hip fracture in men and women. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1936–1943. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200310000-00011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson NA, Stirling ERB, Divall P et al (2017) Risk of hip fracture following a wrist fracture-a meta-analysis. Injury 48:399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INJURY.2016.11.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mallmin H, Ljunghall S, Persson I et al (1993) Fracture of the distal forearm as a forecaster of subsequent hip fracture: a population-based cohort study with 24 years of follow-up. Calcif Tissue Int 52:269–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00296650

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lauritzen JB, Schwarz P, McNair P et al (1993) Radial and humeral fractures as predictors of subsequent hip, radial or humeral fractures in women, and their seasonal variation. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 3:133–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01623274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen CW, le Huang T, Su LT et al (2013) Incidence of subsequent hip fractures is significantly increased within the first month after distal radius fracture in patients older than 60 years. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 74:317–321. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0B013E31824BB325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dang DY, Zetumer S, Zhang AL (2019) Recurrent fragility fractures: a cross-sectional analysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 27:E85–E91. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bolland MJ, Grey AB, Gamble GD, Reid IR (2010) Effect of osteoporosis treatment on mortality: a meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95:1174–1181. https://doi.org/10.1210/JC.2009-0852

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hochberg M (2000) Preventing fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. A review of recent controlled trials of antiresorptive agents. Drugs Aging 17:317–330. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200017040-00007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Matzkin EG, DeMaio M, Charles JF, Franklin CC (2019) Diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis: what orthopaedic surgeons need to know. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 27:E902–E912. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Christensen DL, Nappo KE, Ficke B, Tintle SM (2018) Frequency of bone health presentations at national hand meetings. J Hand Surg 43:187.e1-187.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHSA.2017.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rianon N, Anand D, Rasu R (2013) Changing trends in osteoporosis care from specialty to primary care physicians. Curr Med Res Opin 29:881–888. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2013.809335

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Beaton DE, Dyer S, Jiang D et al (2014) Factors influencing the pharmacological management of osteoporosis after fragility fracture: results from the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy’s fracture clinic screening program. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 25:289–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-013-2430-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Roh YH, Koh Y do, Noh JH, et al (2017) Effect of health literacy on adherence to osteoporosis treatment among patients with distal radius fracture. Arch Osteoporos 12:.https://doi.org/10.1007/S11657-017-0337-0

  27. Spadaro JA, Werner FW, Brenner RA et al (1994) Cortical and trabecular bone contribute strength to the osteopenic distal radius. J Orthop Res 12:211–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOR.1100120210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Thormann U, el Khawassna T, Ray S et al (2014) Differences of bone healing in metaphyseal defect fractures between osteoporotic and physiological bone in rats. Injury 45:487–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INJURY.2013.10.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Namkung-Matthai H, Appleyard R, Jansen J et al (2001) Osteoporosis influences the early period of fracture healing in a rat osteoporotic model. Bone 28:80–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8756-3282(00)00414-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Giannoudis P, Tzioupis C, Almalki T, Buckley R (2007) Fracture healing in osteoporotic fractures: is it really different? A basic science perspective. Injury 38:S90–S99. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INJURY.2007.02.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Egol KA, Walsh M, Romo-Cardoso S et al (2010) Distal radial fractures in the elderly: operative compared with nonoperative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1851–1857. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.00968

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Arora R, Lutz M, Deml C et al (2011) A prospective randomized trial comparing nonoperative treatment with volar locking plate fixation for displaced and unstable distal radial fractures in patients sixty-five years of age and older. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:2146–2153. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.01597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jennings LA, Auerbach AD, Maselli J et al (2010) Missed opportunities for osteoporosis treatment in patients hospitalized for hip fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc 58:650–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1532-5415.2010.02769.X

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Daffner SD, Karnes JM, Watkins CM (2016) Surgeon specialty influences referral rate for osteoporosis management following vertebral compression fractures.https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1569057

  35. LaVallee LA, Scott MA, Hulkower SD (2016) Challenges in the screening and management of osteoporosis. North Carolina Med J 77:416–419. https://doi.org/10.18043/NCM.77.6.416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jantzen C, Cieslak LK, Barzanji AF et al (2016) Colles’ fractures and osteoporosis - a new role for the emergency department. Injury 47:930–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INJURY.2015.11.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Beaton DE, Mamdani M, Zheng H, et al (2017) Improvements in osteoporosis testing and care are found following the wide scale implementation of the Ontario Fracture Clinic Screening Program: an interrupted time series analysis. Medicine 96:https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009012

  38. Rothmann MJ, Möller S, Holmberg T et al (2017) Non-participation in systematic screening for osteoporosis-the ROSE trial. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 28:3389–3399. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-017-4205-Y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Roh YH, Lee ES, Ahn J et al (2019) Factors affecting willingness to get assessed and treated for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 30:1395–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-019-04952-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Palcu P, Munce S, Jaglal SB et al (2020) Understanding patient experiences and challenges to osteoporosis care delivered virtually by telemedicine: a mixed methods study. Osteoporos Int 31:351. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-019-05182-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Harness NG, Funahashi T, Dell R et al (2012) Distal radius fracture risk reduction with a comprehensive osteoporosis management program. J Hand Surg 37:1543–1549. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHSA.2012.04.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wang N, Chen Y, Ji J, et al (2020) The relationship between serum vitamin D and fracture risk in the elderly: a meta-analysis. J OrthopSurg Res 15:https://doi.org/10.1186/S13018-020-01603-Y

  43. Kelm N, Wasfie T, Volk M, et al (2021) Role of fracture liaison service program in reducing refracture rate in the elderly osteoporotic trauma patients presenting with vertebral compression fracture: a six-year study. Am Surg.https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348211047512

  44. Jackson A, Wasfie T, Brock C et al (2020) Fragility vertebral compression fractures in postmenopausal women: the role of a fracture liaison service program. Am Surg 86:1636–1639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003134820933254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nakayama A, Major & G, Holliday E, et al Evidence of effectiveness of a fracture liaison service to reduce the re-fracture rate. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3443-0

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Wake Forest University School of Medicine Atrium / Wake Forest Baptist Health Winston-Salem, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

    Natalie Vaughn, Matthew Akelman, Natalie Marenghi, Anne F. Lake & Benjamin R. Graves

Authors
  1. Natalie Vaughn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew Akelman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natalie Marenghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne F. Lake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benjamin R. Graves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalie Marenghi.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vaughn, N., Akelman, M., Marenghi, N. et al. Patients undergoing surgical treatment for low-energy distal radius fractures are more likely to receive a referral and participate in a fracture liaison service program. Arch Osteoporos 17, 96 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-022-01122-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-022-01122-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation