Postgrad Med J

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Postgraduate Medical Journal 2006;82:528-531; doi:10.1136/pgmj.2005.044370
Copyright © 2006 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peng, E W K
Right arrow Articles by Hatrick, N C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peng, E W K
Right arrow Articles by Hatrick, N C

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Preventing fragility hip fracture in high risk groups: an opportunity missed

E W K Peng , S Elnikety , N C Hatrick

Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
MrN C Hatrick
Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Eastern Road, Brighton, East Sussex BN2 5BE, UK; hatricks{at}hotmail.com

Objective: The national guideline recommends selective case finding as the main strategy by identification of high risk people. This study assessed whether high risk patients were identified before their presentation with fragility fracture.

Methods: A prospective study for 3.5 consecutive months on patients with low energy hip fractures to Brighton and Sussex University Hospital NHS Trusts, which serves a population of 460 000. Data were collected by interview using standardised form, medical record review, and communication with family physicians. Definition of high risk: (1) untreated hypogonadism (2) corticosteroid users (3) disorders with increased bone loss (4) previous fragility fractures.

Results: 98 patients were admitted with hip fracture. Thirty nine (40%) had at least one high risk factor. High risk patients (7 of 39, 18%) were no more likely to receive prophylaxis compared with patients without high risk factor (5 of 59, 8%) (p = 0.21). Previous fragility fracture (23) was the commonest risk factor followed by disorders with increased bone loss (10), premature menopause (10), and corticosteroid users (5). Fifteen patients (15%) had susceptibility to frequent falls and two had maternal history of osteoporosis. The proportion of treated patients were 20% (2 of 10) in premature menopause, 10% (1 of 10) in diseases with secondary osteoporosis, 13% (3 of 23) in previous fragility fracture, and 80% (4 of 5) in corticosteroid users (p = 0.01)

Conclusion: Prevention of hip fracture is still inadequate in high risk patients. Discrepancy seemed to exist in treatment frequency among different high risk groups suggesting that emphasis on prevention of osteoporosis has not been reinforced in all people at risk.


Keywords: osteoporosis; fragility fracture; prevention







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine