Awareness of postmenopausal women about the risk of osteoporosis (literature review)

Authors

  • Olena Vyrva «MDC-LUX» LLC, Kharkiv. Ukraine, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872020496-101

Keywords:

Postmenopausal osteoporosis, osteoporotic fractures, surveys, diagnostic and treatment limitations

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a systemic disease of the skeleton, characteri­zed by a decrease in bone mass and qualitative changes in bone structure, which lead to increased fragility and increased risk of fractures. Objective. To analyze the published information on the awareness of women in the United States, Europe and Ukraine about the risk of osteoporosis in the postmenopausal period. It is estimated that in general, about 50 % of postmenopausal women in most countries do not receive osteoporosis drug therapy and are unaware of the different treatment options for disease, 25 % associate it only with femur and spine fractures. Surveys have found that most respondents without a diagnosis of osteoporosis have had one or more risk factors for developing it, but osteoporosis is often not diagnosed until one or more fractures have occurred. That is why orthopedists-traumatologists, who most often face pathological fractures on the background of osteoporosis, have proposed special protocols for the timely diagnosis and treatment of fragile  fractures. Treatment standards require women aged 65–85 who have suffered a fracture to be screened and receive osteotropic therapy for 6 months. However, the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis for 6 and 12 months after femoral neck fractures received only 17–23 % of respondents. Misconceptions about the causes and consequences of postmenopausal women fractures, combined with insufficient information from health professionals, point to the low level of attention of the population and the health care system in general to osteoporosis in all countries. The incidence of fractures in women was 3.1 higher than in men and progressively increased the age 50+. For high risk fractures women due to osteoporosis ensuring their osteoporosis awareness is a critical preventive point. This is essentialy can influence positive changes in the fight against osteoporosis around the world. Osteoporosis is a systemic disease of the skeleton, characteri­zed by a decrease in bone mass and qualitative changes in bone structure, which lead to increased fragility and increased risk of fractures. Objective. To analyze the published information on the awareness of women in the United States, Europe and Ukraine about the risk of osteoporosis in the postmenopausal period. It is estimated that in general, about 50 % of postmenopausal women in most countries do not receive osteoporosis drug therapy and are unaware of the different treatment options for disease, 25 % associate it only with femur and spine fractures. Surveys have found that most respondents without a diagnosis of osteoporosis have had one or more risk factors for developing it, but osteoporosis is often not diagnosed until one or more fractures have occurred. That is why orthopedists-traumatologists, who most often face pathological fractures on the background of osteoporosis, have proposed special protocols for the timely diagnosis and treatment of fragile  fractures. Treatment standards require women aged 65–85 who have suffered a fracture to be screened and receive osteotropic therapy for 6 months. However, the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis for 6 and 12 months after femoral neck fractures received only 17–23 % of respondents. Misconceptions about the causes and consequences of postmenopausal women fractures, combined with insufficient information from health professionals, point to the low level of attention of the population and the health care system in general to osteoporosis in all countries. The incidence of fractures in women was 3.1 higher than in men and progressively increased the age 50+. For high risk fractures women due to osteoporosis ensuring their osteoporosis awareness is a critical preventive point. This is essentialy can influence positive changes in the fight against osteoporosis around the world.

References

  1. Nuti, R., Brandi, M. L., Checchia, G., Di Munno, O., Dominguez, L., Falaschi, P., … & Isaia, G. C. (2018). Guidelines for the management of osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Internal and Emergency Medicine, 14(1), 85-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-018-1874-2
  2. Povoroznyuk, V. V. (2009). Diseases of the musculoskeletal system in people of different ages (selected lectures, reviews, articles): in 3 volumes. Kyiv: Express. [in Ukrainian]
  3. Korzh, N. A., Povoroznyuk, V. V., Dedukh, N. V., & Zupanets, I. A. (2002). Osteoporosis: epidemiology, clinical picture, diagnostics, prevention and treatment. Kharkiv: Golden Pages. [in Russian]
  4. Leder, B. Z., & Wein, M. N. (2020). Osteoporosis: pathophysiology and clinical ma­nagement. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69287-6
  5. (2017). Profiles of Ageing 2017. World / United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Retriewed from: https://population.un.org/ProfilesOfAgeing2017/index.html
  6. Rockville, M. D. (2004). Bone health and osteoporosis: a report of the Surgeon General. Retriewed from : https://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/
  7. (2010). US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US Census Bureau The next four decades. The older population in the United States: 2010 to 2050. Population estimates and projections. Washington (DC): US Department of Commerce. Retriewed from https://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p25-1138.pdf
  8. Burge, R., Dawson-Hughes, B., Solomon, D. H., Wong, J. B., King, A., & Tosteson, A. (2006). Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 22(3), 465-475. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.061113
  9. Mora, A. N., Blazar, P. E., Rogers, J. C., & Earp, B. E. (2020). Patient perceptions and preferences for osteoporosis treatment. The Journal of Hand Surgery, 45(2), 153.e1-153.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.01.018
  10. Barton, D. W., Griffin, D. C., & Carmouche, J. J. (2019). Orthopedic surgeons’ views on the osteoporosis care gap and potential solutions: Survey results. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1103-3
  11. Weaver, J. P., Olsson, K., Sadasivan, R., Modi, A., & Sen, S. (2017). Reasons for not treating women with postmenopausal osteoporosis with prescription medications: Physicians' and patients' perspectives. Journal of Women's Health, 26(12), 1302-1311. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.6263
  12. Gillespie, C. W., & Morin, P. E. (2017). Trends and disparities in osteoporosis screening among women in the United States, 2008-2014. The American Journal of Medicine, 130(3), 306-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.10.018
  13. Leader, D., Williams, S., Curtis, J., & Weiss, R. (2018). Osteoporosis-related fracture events in the US. Journal of Clinical Densitometry, 21(4), 606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2018.05.027
  14. Gillespie, C. W., & Morin, P. E. (2018). Osteoporosis-related health services utilization following first hip fracture among a cohort of privately-insured women in the United States, 2008-2014: An observational study. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 33(3), 549-549. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.3366
  15. Lewiecki, E. M., Leader, D., Weiss, R., & Williams, S. A. (2019). Challenges in osteoporosis awareness and management: Results from a survey of US postmenopausal women. Journal of Drug Assessment, 8(1), 25-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/21556660.2019.1579728
  16. McCloskey, E., Rathi, J., Heijmans, S., Blagden, M., Cortet, B., Czerwinski, E., … & Papapoulos, S. (2020). The osteoporosis treatment gap in patients at risk of fracture in European primary care: A multi-country cross-sectional observational study. Osteoporosis International. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05557-z
  17. Borgström, F., Karlsson, L., Ortsäter, G., Norton, N., Halbout, P., Cooper, C., … & Kanis, J. A. (2020). Fragility fractures in Europe: Burden, management and opportunities. Archives of Osteoporosis, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-020-0706-y
  18. Povoroznyuk, V., Del Rio, L., Di Gregorio, S., Michelet, F., Dzerovych, N., Musiienko, A., & Winzenrieth, R. (2014). Is TBS different in healthy European Caucasian men and women? Creation of normative spine TBS data for men. PAIN, JOINTS, SPINE, (3), 20-23. https://doi.org/10.22141/2224-1507.3.15.2014.79939
  19. Tishchenko, I. V., Bondareva, O. O., & Yesaulenko, I. A. (2018). Reality of awareness of permanent residents of the industrial region about the problem of osteoporosis. Medical perspectives, 3(1) 209-215. [in Ukrainian]
  20. Osteoporosis testing and management in older women. Washington (DC): National Committee for Quality Assurance Retrieved from: http://www.ncqa.org/report-cards/health-plans/state-of-health-care-quality/2017-table-of-contents/osteoporosis
  21. Orces, C. H., & Martinez, F. J. (2010). Epidemiology of fall related forearm and wrist fractures among adults treated in US hospital emergency departments. Injury Prevention, 17(1), 33-36. https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2010.026799
  22. Edwards, B. J., Song, J., Dunlop, D. D., Fink, H. A., & Cauley, J. A. (2010). Functional decline after incident wrist fractures--study of Osteoporotic fractures: Prospective cohort study. BMJ, 341(jul08 1), 3324-3324. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c3324

Downloads

How to Cite

Vyrva, O. (2023). Awareness of postmenopausal women about the risk of osteoporosis (literature review). ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY and PROSTHETICS, (4), 96–101. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872020496-101

Issue

No. 4 (2020)

Section

DIGESTS AND REVIEWS

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Olena Vyrva

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The authors retain the right of authorship of their manuscript and pass the journal the right of the first publication of this article, which automatically become available from the date of publication under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published manuscript with mandatory linking to authors of the original research and the first publication of this one in this journal.

Authors have the right to enter into a separate supplemental agreement on the additional non-exclusive distribution of manuscript in the form in which it was published by the journal (i.e. to put work in electronic storage of an institution or publish as a part of the book) while maintaining the reference to the first publication of the manuscript in this journal.

The editorial policy of the journal allows authors and encourages manuscript accommodation online (i.e. in storage of an institution or on the personal websites) as before submission of the manuscript to the editorial office, and during its editorial processing because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of the published manuscript citation (see The Effect of Open Access).