LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/“Crisis” as High Risk Fracture Patients Go Undiagnosed, Untreated
Spine

“Crisis” as High Risk Fracture Patients Go Undiagnosed, Untreated

July 5, 2016 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

“Crisis” as High Risk Fracture Patients Go Undiagnosed, Untreated
Source: Wikimedia Commons and THWZ
Secondary

A new study suggests that osteoporosis patients are not getting the care they need.

According to the June 23, 2016 news release, Sundeep Khosla, M.D., a practicing endocrinologist, research scientist, professor of medicine and director of the Clinical and Translational Science Award Program at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, and Elizabeth Shane, M.D., a practicing endocrinologist, research scientist, professor of medicine and vice chair for clinical and epidemiological research at Columbia University have found too many patients at high risk for fractures are not being diagnosed or treated to prevent them.

The authors state, “We should be viewing the future for our patients with osteoporosis with unparalleled optimism, because we now have several drugs that can markedly reduce fracture incidence, by as much as 70% in the case of vertebral fractures. Thus, while physicians still struggle to treat many other conditions that are currently intractable, including Alzheimer’s and many cancers, the good news is that the prevention of fractures is clearly within our reach. And yet, despite the development of several effective drugs to prevent fractures, many patients, even those who unequivocally need treatment, are either not being prescribed osteoporosis medications at all, or when prescribed, refuse to take them.”

Asked what gets in the way of a physician prescribing these drugs, Dr. Khosla told OTW, “Osteoporosis may be one of multiple conditions the patient has (e.g., diabetes, heart failure) and the physician just does not give it sufficient priority. Sometimes, there is just a lack of physician awareness about the disease. More recently, concerns about the relatively rare side effects of bisphosphonates (i.e., osteonecrosis of the jaw, atypical femur fractures).

“A patient who has had an osteoporotic fracture (e.g., of the distal radius, spine, hip, or upper arm) is at increased risk of subsequent fracture and is generally a candidate for pharmacological therapy. Any patient over 50 years of age who has one of these fractures should have a DXA [dual X-ray absorptiometry] bone density scan and be considered for treatment.

“We clearly need better ways to proactively identify the rare group of patients who develop osteonecrosis of the jaw or atypical femur fractures. Fear of these complications is keeping many patients who could truly benefit from these drugs from taking them.”

Asked what more can be done, Dr. Khosla noted, “Better patient and physician education about the consequences of untreated osteoporosis—disability, pain, and increased mortality following hip fracture. Also, more work on educating patients in particular about the benefit to risk ratio of bisphosphonates and other osteoporosis drugs. For a patient meeting current guidelines for treatment, considerable data shows that the benefits far outweigh the risks and that the risks from a hip fracture far outweigh the rare risks from the treatments. But we still need to work on identifying the patients at risk for complications from these medications.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy