Characterization and effectiveness of a Fracture Liaison Services program in Colombia.

PURPOSE: Fracture Liaison Services programs reduce mortality and the risk of refracture and increase treatment and adherence rates. Greater coverage is an important priority for the future. The aim was to determine the characteristics of patients over 50 years old who suffered fractures and the effectiveness of a Fracture Liaison Services program in a health care institution in Colombia. METHODS: This was a retrospective follow-up study of a cohort of patients with vertebral and nonvertebral fractures managed in a Fracture Liaison Services program. Sociodemographic, clinical and pharmacological variables were identified. Key performance indicators were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Descriptive and bivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients were analyzed. The average age was 77.5 years, and 78.5% were women. Hip and vertebral fractures were the most common (25.3% and 24.9%, respectively). Vertebral fractures prevailed in men (33.0% vs 22.7%; p = 0.041) and those of the radius/ulna in women (20.3% vs 10.6%; p = 0.031). A total of 29.7% had experienced a previous fracture, and 16.7% had received antiosteoporosis drugs. A total of 63.5% of the cases were managed surgically. At discharge, 58.8% received prescriptions for calcium/vitamin D, and 50.7% with prescriptions of antiosteoporotic therapy, especially teriparatide (21.2%) and denosumab (16.4%), without significant differences by sex. However, in women with hip fractures, anti-osteoporotic management prevailed (83.7% vs 64.0; p = 0.032). The effectiveness of the overall program per year was 74.6%. On follow-up, only 9.1% of patients had experienced a new fall, and of those 3.7% presented a new fracture. A total of 4.3% died during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Good adherence to the recommendations of the country's clinical practice guidelines was found, and overall, the effectiveness of the program was very satisfactory, with a low incidence of new fractures during follow-up. Fracture Liaison Services programs reduce mortality and the risk of refracture. A retrospective follow-up study of a cohort of patients with vertebral and nonvertebral fractures managed in a Fracture Liaison Services, showed that the effectiveness was 73.6%. On follow-up, 9.1% of patients had experienced a new fall, and of those 3.7% presented a new fracture.

Use of Systemic Antibiotics in Patients with COVID-19 in Colombia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Antibiotics are frequently prescribed to patients with COVID-19. The aim was to determine the pattern of use of systemic antibiotics in a group of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Colombia between 2020-2022. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study designed to identify antibiotics prescription patterns for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 treated in eight clinics in Colombia. The AWaRe tool of the World Health Organization (WHO) was used to classify the antibiotics. A total of 10,916 patients were included. The median age was 57 years, and 56.4% were male. A total of 57.5% received antibiotics, especially ampicillin/sulbactam (58.8%) and clarithromycin (47.9%). Most of the antibiotics were classified as Watch (65.1%), followed by Access (32.6%) and Reserve (2.4%). Men (OR: 1.29; 95%CI: 1.17-1.43), older adults (OR: 1.67; 95%CI: 1.48-1.88), patients with dyspnea (OR: 1.26; 95%CI: 1.13-1.41), rheumatoid arthritis (OR: 1.94; 95%CI: 1.17-3.20), and high blood pressure at admission (OR: 1.45; 95%CI: 1.29-1.63), patients treated in-hospital (OR: 5.15; 95%CI: 4.59-5.77), patients admitted to the ICU (OR: 10.48; 95%CI: 8.82-12.45), patients treated with systemic glucocorticoids (OR: 3.60; 95%CI: 3.21-4.03) and vasopressors (OR: 2.10; 95%CI: 1.60-2.75), and patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.37; 95%CI: 1.82-3.09) were more likely to receive a systemic antibiotic. Most of the patients diagnosed with COVID-19 received antibiotics, despite evidence showing that bacterial coinfection is rare. Antibiotics from the Watch group predominated, a practice that goes against WHO recommendations.