File(s) under permanent embargo
Osteoporosis medication use among Australian women over two decades
journal contribution
posted on 2020-05-01, 00:00 authored by Amanda StuartAmanda Stuart, Julie PascoJulie Pasco, Mohammadreza MohebbiMohammadreza Mohebbi, Mark KotowiczMark Kotowicz, Kara L Holloway-Kew, Sarah HoskingSarah Hosking, Lana WilliamsLana WilliamsSummary
Despite the burden of osteoporosis and treatment availability, a treatment gap remains. Women in a population-based study were followed with respect to use of anti-fracture medication over two decades. Use increased over time but remained suboptimal, with less than 20% of those at high risk of fracture receiving treatment.
Purpose
We examined trends in osteoporosis-related medication use over time using data from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, an ongoing, population-based study.
Methods
Self-reported medication use data were available for 822 women (50–90 years) at time-1 (1993–1997), 575 women at time-2 (2004–2008), and 527 women at time-3 (2011–2014) participating in a longitudinal study. Prevalence of any osteoporosis-related medication use (pooled anti-fracture (bisphosphonates, raloxifene, denosumab, or strontium); hormone therapy; and supplements (calcium and/or vitamin D)) was calculated using bootstrapping methods for the whole group and those at risk of fracture, identified using FRAX Aus® (probability of major osteoporotic fracture ≥ 20% and/or ≥ 3% hip fracture) and BMD (osteoporosis indicated by a T-score of less than − 2.5 at either the femoral neck or spine). Time trend (age groups 50–59, 60–69, 70–79, 80+ years) and time-point effects were evaluated using mixed effects logistic models.
Results
The use of any osteoporosis-related medication increased over three time points (time-1, 25.9% (95% CI 23.1, 28.8); time-2, 32.5% (28.7, 36.3); time-3, 35.9% (31.9, 39.8)), driven by the use of supplements (time-1, 12.9% (95% CI 10.6, 15.1); time-2, 22.1% (18.8, 25.4); time-3, 30.9% (26.9, 35.5)) and anti-fracture medication (time-1, 0.9% (0.4, 1.6); time-2, 5.0% (3.3, 6.8); time-3, 4.4% (2.7, 6.3)). Women at high risk of fracture were identified by BMD (time-1, n = 231 (28.1%); time-2, n = 92 (16.0%); time-3, n = 51 (9.7%)) and FRAX criteria (time-1, n = 272 (33.1%); time-2, n = 105 (18.3%); time-3, n = 100 (19.0%)). The use of anti-fracture medication was low among these groups (BMD criteria: time-1, 1.7% (0.4, 3.7); time-2, 16.3% (8.7, 24.3); time-3, 15.7% (7.1, 26.1); FRAX criteria: time-1, 1.1% (0.0, 2.3); time-2, 18.1% (11.5, 25.5); time-3, 13.0% (6.5, 19.8)).
Conclusion
Use of anti-fracture medication among women at risk of fracture remained low over time. Investment into systems approaches to correct the treatment gap is warranted.
Despite the burden of osteoporosis and treatment availability, a treatment gap remains. Women in a population-based study were followed with respect to use of anti-fracture medication over two decades. Use increased over time but remained suboptimal, with less than 20% of those at high risk of fracture receiving treatment.
Purpose
We examined trends in osteoporosis-related medication use over time using data from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, an ongoing, population-based study.
Methods
Self-reported medication use data were available for 822 women (50–90 years) at time-1 (1993–1997), 575 women at time-2 (2004–2008), and 527 women at time-3 (2011–2014) participating in a longitudinal study. Prevalence of any osteoporosis-related medication use (pooled anti-fracture (bisphosphonates, raloxifene, denosumab, or strontium); hormone therapy; and supplements (calcium and/or vitamin D)) was calculated using bootstrapping methods for the whole group and those at risk of fracture, identified using FRAX Aus® (probability of major osteoporotic fracture ≥ 20% and/or ≥ 3% hip fracture) and BMD (osteoporosis indicated by a T-score of less than − 2.5 at either the femoral neck or spine). Time trend (age groups 50–59, 60–69, 70–79, 80+ years) and time-point effects were evaluated using mixed effects logistic models.
Results
The use of any osteoporosis-related medication increased over three time points (time-1, 25.9% (95% CI 23.1, 28.8); time-2, 32.5% (28.7, 36.3); time-3, 35.9% (31.9, 39.8)), driven by the use of supplements (time-1, 12.9% (95% CI 10.6, 15.1); time-2, 22.1% (18.8, 25.4); time-3, 30.9% (26.9, 35.5)) and anti-fracture medication (time-1, 0.9% (0.4, 1.6); time-2, 5.0% (3.3, 6.8); time-3, 4.4% (2.7, 6.3)). Women at high risk of fracture were identified by BMD (time-1, n = 231 (28.1%); time-2, n = 92 (16.0%); time-3, n = 51 (9.7%)) and FRAX criteria (time-1, n = 272 (33.1%); time-2, n = 105 (18.3%); time-3, n = 100 (19.0%)). The use of anti-fracture medication was low among these groups (BMD criteria: time-1, 1.7% (0.4, 3.7); time-2, 16.3% (8.7, 24.3); time-3, 15.7% (7.1, 26.1); FRAX criteria: time-1, 1.1% (0.0, 2.3); time-2, 18.1% (11.5, 25.5); time-3, 13.0% (6.5, 19.8)).
Conclusion
Use of anti-fracture medication among women at risk of fracture remained low over time. Investment into systems approaches to correct the treatment gap is warranted.
