Cargando…
A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces
SUMMARY: The scorecard evaluates the burden and management of osteoporosis in Canada and how care pathways differ across Canadian provinces. The results showed there are inequities in patients’ access to diagnosis, treatment, and post-fracture care programs in Canada. Interventions are needed to clo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer London
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7755868/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32712739 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05554-2 |
_version_ | 1783626421899362304 |
---|---|
author | Kendler, D.L. Adachi, J.D. Brown, J.P. Juby, A.G. Kovacs, C.S. Duperrouzel, C. McTavish, R.K. Cameron, C. Slatkovska, L. Burke, N. |
author_facet | Kendler, D.L. Adachi, J.D. Brown, J.P. Juby, A.G. Kovacs, C.S. Duperrouzel, C. McTavish, R.K. Cameron, C. Slatkovska, L. Burke, N. |
author_sort | Kendler, D.L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | SUMMARY: The scorecard evaluates the burden and management of osteoporosis in Canada and how care pathways differ across Canadian provinces. The results showed there are inequities in patients’ access to diagnosis, treatment, and post-fracture care programs in Canada. Interventions are needed to close the osteoporosis treatment gap and minimize these inequities. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to develop a visual scorecard that assesses the burden of osteoporosis and its management within Canada and seven Canadian provinces. METHODS: We adapted the Scorecard for Osteoporosis in Europe (SCOPE) to score osteoporosis indicators for Canada and seven provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland). We obtained data from a comprehensive literature review and interviews with osteoporosis experts. We scored 20 elements across four domains: burden of disease, policy framework, service provision, and service uptake. Each element was scored as red, yellow, or green, indicating high, intermediate, or low risk, respectively. Elements with insufficient data were scored black. RESULTS: Canada performed well on several elements of osteoporosis care, including high uptake of risk assessment algorithms and minimal wait times for hip fracture surgery. However, there were no established fracture registries, and reporting on individuals with high fracture risk who remain untreated was limited. Furthermore, osteoporosis was not an official health priority in most provinces. Government-backed action plans and other osteoporosis initiatives were primarily confined to Ontario and Alberta. Several provinces (Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Newfoundland) did not have any registered fracture liaison service (FLS) programs. Access to diagnosis and treatment was also inconsistent and reimbursement policies did not align with clinical guidelines. CONCLUSION: Government-backed action plans are needed to address provincial inequities in patients’ access to diagnosis, treatment, and FLS programs in Canada. Further characterization of the treatment gap and the establishment of fracture registries are critical next steps in providing high-quality osteoporosis care. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00198-020-05554-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7755868 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer London |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77558682020-12-28 A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces Kendler, D.L. Adachi, J.D. Brown, J.P. Juby, A.G. Kovacs, C.S. Duperrouzel, C. McTavish, R.K. Cameron, C. Slatkovska, L. Burke, N. Osteoporos Int Original Article SUMMARY: The scorecard evaluates the burden and management of osteoporosis in Canada and how care pathways differ across Canadian provinces. The results showed there are inequities in patients’ access to diagnosis, treatment, and post-fracture care programs in Canada. Interventions are needed to close the osteoporosis treatment gap and minimize these inequities. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to develop a visual scorecard that assesses the burden of osteoporosis and its management within Canada and seven Canadian provinces. METHODS: We adapted the Scorecard for Osteoporosis in Europe (SCOPE) to score osteoporosis indicators for Canada and seven provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland). We obtained data from a comprehensive literature review and interviews with osteoporosis experts. We scored 20 elements across four domains: burden of disease, policy framework, service provision, and service uptake. Each element was scored as red, yellow, or green, indicating high, intermediate, or low risk, respectively. Elements with insufficient data were scored black. RESULTS: Canada performed well on several elements of osteoporosis care, including high uptake of risk assessment algorithms and minimal wait times for hip fracture surgery. However, there were no established fracture registries, and reporting on individuals with high fracture risk who remain untreated was limited. Furthermore, osteoporosis was not an official health priority in most provinces. Government-backed action plans and other osteoporosis initiatives were primarily confined to Ontario and Alberta. Several provinces (Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Newfoundland) did not have any registered fracture liaison service (FLS) programs. Access to diagnosis and treatment was also inconsistent and reimbursement policies did not align with clinical guidelines. CONCLUSION: Government-backed action plans are needed to address provincial inequities in patients’ access to diagnosis, treatment, and FLS programs in Canada. Further characterization of the treatment gap and the establishment of fracture registries are critical next steps in providing high-quality osteoporosis care. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00198-020-05554-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer London 2020-07-25 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7755868/ /pubmed/32712739 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05554-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Kendler, D.L. Adachi, J.D. Brown, J.P. Juby, A.G. Kovacs, C.S. Duperrouzel, C. McTavish, R.K. Cameron, C. Slatkovska, L. Burke, N. A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title | A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title_full | A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title_fullStr | A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title_full_unstemmed | A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title_short | A scorecard for osteoporosis in Canada and seven Canadian provinces |
title_sort | scorecard for osteoporosis in canada and seven canadian provinces |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7755868/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32712739 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05554-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kendlerdl ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT adachijd ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT brownjp ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT jubyag ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT kovacscs ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT duperrouzelc ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT mctavishrk ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT cameronc ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT slatkovskal ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT burken ascorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT kendlerdl scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT adachijd scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT brownjp scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT jubyag scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT kovacscs scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT duperrouzelc scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT mctavishrk scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT cameronc scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT slatkovskal scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces AT burken scorecardforosteoporosisincanadaandsevencanadianprovinces |