Author:
Rotondi Nooshin K.,Beaton Dorcas E.,Sujic Rebeka,Sale Joanna E.M.,Ansari Hina,Elliot-Gibson Victoria,Bogoch Earl R.,Cullen John,Jain Ravi,Slater Morgan,
Abstract
Objective.To identify and address patient-reported barriers in osteoporosis care after a fracture.Methods.A longitudinal cohort of fragility fracture patients over 50 years of age was seen in a provincewide fracture liaison service. Followup interviews were done at 6 months for osteoporosis care indicators. Univariate statistics were used to describe baseline characteristics, osteoporosis-related outcomes, and reasons cited for not achieving them. Two phases of this program were compared (Phase I: education and communication, and Phase II: risk assessment education and communication). Phase II was further divided into those who fully participated and those who declined.Results.Phase I (n = 3997) had lower testing and treatment rates than Phase II (n = 1363). Rates were highest in those confirmed as having participated in Phase II (n = 569). Phase II nonparticipants (n = 794) had results as in Phase I. In Phase I, the main patient-reported barriers for not visiting their physician or not having a bone mineral density (BMD) test were patient- and physician-oriented (e.g., being instructed by their physician to not have the BMD test). In Phase II, BMD testing was part of the program, thus the main barriers were around treatment choices. Phase II eligible nonparticipants experienced many of the same barriers as Phase I patients, with lower BMD testing rates (54.9% and 65.4%, respectively).Conclusion.Evaluating and addressing barriers to guideline implementation reduced those barriers and was associated with higher downstream treatment rates. Monitoring barriers in a program like this provides useful insights for program changes and research interventions.
Publisher
The Journal of Rheumatology
Subject
Immunology,Immunology and Allergy,Rheumatology
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献