The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Describing variation in the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture: an overview of 11 hospitals within one regional area in England

Describing variation in the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture: an overview of 11 hospitals within one regional area in England
Describing variation in the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture: an overview of 11 hospitals within one regional area in England
Summary: there is variation in how services to prevent second fractures after hip fracture are organised. We explored this in more detail at 11 hospitals. Results showed that there was unwarranted variation across a number of aspects of care. This information can be used to inform service delivery in the future.

Introduction: hip fractures are usually the result of low impact falls and underlying osteoporosis. Since the risk of further fractures in osteoporotic patients can be reduced by between 20 and 70 % with bone protection therapy, the NHS is under an obligation to provide effective fracture prevention services for hip fracture patients to reduce risk of further fractures. Evidence suggests there is variation in service organisation. The objective of the study was to explore this variation in more detail by looking at the services provided in one region in England.

Methods: a questionnaire was designed which included questions around staffing, models of care and how the four components of fracture prevention (case finding, osteoporosis assessment, treatment initiation and adherence (monitoring) were undertaken. We also examined falls prevention services. Clinicians involved in the delivery of osteoporosis services at 11 hospitals in one region in England completed the questionnaire.

Results: the service overview showed significant variation in service organisation across all aspects of care examined. All sites provided some form of case finding and assessment. However, interesting differences arose when we examined how these components were structured. Eight sites generally initiated treatment in an inpatient setting, two in outpatients and one in primary care. Monitoring was undertaken by secondary care at seven sites and the remainder conducted by GPs.

Conclusions: the variability in service provision was not explained by local variations in care need. Further work is now needed to establish how the variability in service provision affects key patient, clinical and health economic outcomes.
0937-941X
2427-2433
Drew, S.
0b2cbf84-90e4-4186-9714-07e7288daa1e
Sheard, S.
e6cc1bbe-dcb3-4aab-a51f-4f912213ebeb
Chana, J.
b60220f9-d766-478a-9ee9-50296e25c1f5
Cooper, C.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Javaid, M.K.
51d3310b-032e-4c15-83ac-b878bce090f3
Judge, A.
c6a83964-1d7c-4aa8-b2bf-9c264d1e487d
Drew, S.
0b2cbf84-90e4-4186-9714-07e7288daa1e
Sheard, S.
e6cc1bbe-dcb3-4aab-a51f-4f912213ebeb
Chana, J.
b60220f9-d766-478a-9ee9-50296e25c1f5
Cooper, C.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Javaid, M.K.
51d3310b-032e-4c15-83ac-b878bce090f3
Judge, A.
c6a83964-1d7c-4aa8-b2bf-9c264d1e487d

Drew, S., Sheard, S., Chana, J., Cooper, C., Javaid, M.K. and Judge, A. (2014) Describing variation in the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture: an overview of 11 hospitals within one regional area in England. Osteoporosis International, 25 (10), 2427-2433. (doi:10.1007/s00198-014-2775-5). (PMID:24964893)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Summary: there is variation in how services to prevent second fractures after hip fracture are organised. We explored this in more detail at 11 hospitals. Results showed that there was unwarranted variation across a number of aspects of care. This information can be used to inform service delivery in the future.

Introduction: hip fractures are usually the result of low impact falls and underlying osteoporosis. Since the risk of further fractures in osteoporotic patients can be reduced by between 20 and 70 % with bone protection therapy, the NHS is under an obligation to provide effective fracture prevention services for hip fracture patients to reduce risk of further fractures. Evidence suggests there is variation in service organisation. The objective of the study was to explore this variation in more detail by looking at the services provided in one region in England.

Methods: a questionnaire was designed which included questions around staffing, models of care and how the four components of fracture prevention (case finding, osteoporosis assessment, treatment initiation and adherence (monitoring) were undertaken. We also examined falls prevention services. Clinicians involved in the delivery of osteoporosis services at 11 hospitals in one region in England completed the questionnaire.

Results: the service overview showed significant variation in service organisation across all aspects of care examined. All sites provided some form of case finding and assessment. However, interesting differences arose when we examined how these components were structured. Eight sites generally initiated treatment in an inpatient setting, two in outpatients and one in primary care. Monitoring was undertaken by secondary care at seven sites and the remainder conducted by GPs.

Conclusions: the variability in service provision was not explained by local variations in care need. Further work is now needed to establish how the variability in service provision affects key patient, clinical and health economic outcomes.

Text
'Archives of Osteoporosis' Describing variation in the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture, revised manuscript.docx - Other
Download (86kB)

More information

Published date: October 2014
Organisations: Human Development & Health

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 370134
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/370134
ISSN: 0937-941X
PURE UUID: 0a3db3f1-e98b-4d31-8e98-af3dcf43bc28
ORCID for C. Cooper: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3510-0709

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Oct 2014 11:23
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 02:45

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: S. Drew
Author: S. Sheard
Author: J. Chana
Author: C. Cooper ORCID iD
Author: M.K. Javaid
Author: A. Judge

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×