TY - JOUR
T1 - Regional differences in treatment for osteoporosis. The Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW)
AU - Díez-Pérez, Adolfo
AU - Hooven, Frederick H.
AU - Adachi, Jonathan D.
AU - Adami, Silvano
AU - Anderson, Frederick A.
AU - Boonen, Steven
AU - Chapurlat, Roland
AU - Compston, Juliet E.
AU - Cooper, Cyrus
AU - Delmas, Pierre
AU - Greenspan, Susan L.
AU - LaCroix, Andrea Z.
AU - Lindsay, Robert
AU - Netelenbos, J. Coen
AU - Pfeilschifter, Johannes
AU - Roux, Christian
AU - Saag, Kenneth G.
AU - Sambrook, Philip
AU - Silverman, Stuart
AU - Siris, Ethel S.
AU - Watts, Nelson B.
AU - Nika, Grigor
AU - Gehlbach, Stephen H.
PY - 2011/9/1
Y1 - 2011/9/1
N2 - Purpose: To determine if important geographic differences exist in treatment rates for osteoporosis and whether this variation can be explained by regional variation in risk factors. Methods: The Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women is an observational study of women ≥ 55. years sampled from primary care practices in 10 countries. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data on patient characteristics, risk factors for fracture, previous fractures, anti-osteoporosis medication, and health status. Results: Among 58,009 women, current anti-osteoporosis medication use was lowest in Northern Europe (16%) and highest in USA and Australia (32%). Between 48% (USA, Southern Europe) and 68% (Northern Europe) of women aged ≥ 65. years with a history of spine or hip fracture since age 45 were untreated. Among women with osteoporosis, the percentage of treated cases was lowest in Europe (45-52% versus 62-65% elsewhere). Women with osteopenia and no other risk factors were treated with anti-osteoporosis medication most frequently in USA (31%) and Canada (31%), and least frequently in Southern Europe (12%), Northern Europe (13%), and Australia (16%). After adjusting for risk factors, US women were threefold as likely to be treated with anti-osteoporosis medication as Northern European women (odds ratio 2.8; 95% confidence interval 2.5-3.1) and 1.5 times as likely to be treated as Southern European women (1.5, 1.4-1.6). Up to half of women reporting previous hip or spine fracture did not receive treatment. Conclusions: The likelihood of being treated for osteoporosis differed between regions, and cannot be explained by variation in risk factors. Many women at risk of fracture do not receive prophylaxis. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.
AB - Purpose: To determine if important geographic differences exist in treatment rates for osteoporosis and whether this variation can be explained by regional variation in risk factors. Methods: The Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women is an observational study of women ≥ 55. years sampled from primary care practices in 10 countries. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data on patient characteristics, risk factors for fracture, previous fractures, anti-osteoporosis medication, and health status. Results: Among 58,009 women, current anti-osteoporosis medication use was lowest in Northern Europe (16%) and highest in USA and Australia (32%). Between 48% (USA, Southern Europe) and 68% (Northern Europe) of women aged ≥ 65. years with a history of spine or hip fracture since age 45 were untreated. Among women with osteoporosis, the percentage of treated cases was lowest in Europe (45-52% versus 62-65% elsewhere). Women with osteopenia and no other risk factors were treated with anti-osteoporosis medication most frequently in USA (31%) and Canada (31%), and least frequently in Southern Europe (12%), Northern Europe (13%), and Australia (16%). After adjusting for risk factors, US women were threefold as likely to be treated with anti-osteoporosis medication as Northern European women (odds ratio 2.8; 95% confidence interval 2.5-3.1) and 1.5 times as likely to be treated as Southern European women (1.5, 1.4-1.6). Up to half of women reporting previous hip or spine fracture did not receive treatment. Conclusions: The likelihood of being treated for osteoporosis differed between regions, and cannot be explained by variation in risk factors. Many women at risk of fracture do not receive prophylaxis. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.
KW - Fracture
KW - Preventive treatment
KW - Regional variation
KW - Risk factor
KW - Women
U2 - 10.1016/j.bone.2011.05.007
DO - 10.1016/j.bone.2011.05.007
M3 - Article
SN - 8756-3282
VL - 49
SP - 493
EP - 498
JO - Bone
JF - Bone
IS - 3
ER -