Testing and treatment for osteoporosis following hip fracture in an integrated U.S. healthcare delivery system.

UNLABELLED: Older veterans with acute hip fracture do not receive adequate evaluation and treatment for osteoporosis, irrespective of their age and underlying health status. INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures are a serious complication of osteoporosis, leading to high mortality and morbidity. Prior studies have found significant undertreatment of osteoporosis in women with hip fracture. We examined the rate of bone density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis treatment among a predominantly male population hospitalized with hip fractures. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients age 65 years and older hospitalized in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals with hip fracture (N = 3,347) between 1 October, 2004 and 30 September, 2006. The primary outcome was receipt of BMD testing or initiation of pharmacotherapy within 12 months of fracture. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 79.0 years (SD = 6.7), 96.5% were male, and 83.3% were white. Only 1.2% of hip fracture patients underwent BMD testing and 14.5% received osteoporosis therapy within 12 months of fracture. Among fracture patients with minimal comorbid illness (N = 756) only 1.6% underwent BMD testing and 13.0% received pharmacotherapy. In logistic regression models, treatment rates were higher for women compared to men (odds ratio, 3.30; 95% CI, 2.16-5.04) and lower for blacks compared to whites (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis among patients with fractures is suboptimal even in an integrated healthcare delivery system with generous pharmaceutical coverage. This study suggests that the undertreatment of osteoporosis demonstrated in the private sector is also present within the VA.

Valve type and long-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement in older patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) according to valve type specifically in older patients since valve-related risks are age-dependent; two randomised trials comparing mechanical and bioprosthetic valves found better outcomes with mechanical valves, but the samples were small and the patients were considerably younger than most who undergo AVR. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: 1199 US hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients 65 years and older undergoing AVR during 1991-2003 (n = 307 054) identified through Medicare claims data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative hazard ratios associated with bioprosthetic valves of (1) death (n = 131,719); (2) readmission for haemorrhage (n = 31,186), stroke (n = 25,051) or embolism (n = 5870); (3) reoperation (n = 4216); and (4) death or reoperation (reoperation free survival) in Cox regression analyses adjusting for demographic and clinical factors and hospital-level effects. RESULTS: Overall, 36% of AVR patients received bioprosthetic valves. Bioprosthetic valve recipients were older (77 vs 75 years, p<0.001) and generally had higher comorbidity. Bioprosthetic valve recipients had a slightly lower adjusted hazard ratios of death (HR = 0.97; 95% CI 0.95 to 0.98); readmission for haemorrhage, stroke or embolism (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.92); and death or reoperation (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.98), but a higher hazard ratio of reoperation (HR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.35). However, overall mortality and complication rates were more than 20 and 10 times higher, respectively, than the overall reoperation rate. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients undergoing AVR, bioprosthetic valve recipients had slightly lower risks of death and complications, but a higher risk of reoperation. Given the low reoperation rate, these data suggest that bioprosthetic valves may be preferred in older patients.