A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported fracture liaison service following femur fragility fracture: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

IF 5.4
Jordi Martín Marcuello, Alessio Rodolico, María Laura Britez Carli, Mireia Puig Campmany, Marta Blazquez Andion, Julio de Caso Rodríguez, Mar Gomis Pastor, Jordi Real Gatius, Anna de Dios López, Sebastián Fradejas Moschino, Esther Pallarés, Jesús Alburquerque, María Del Mar Lluch Targarona, Jordi Mascaró Lamarca
{"title":"A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported fracture liaison service following femur fragility fracture: a pilot randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Jordi Martín Marcuello, Alessio Rodolico, María Laura Britez Carli, Mireia Puig Campmany, Marta Blazquez Andion, Julio de Caso Rodríguez, Mar Gomis Pastor, Jordi Real Gatius, Anna de Dios López, Sebastián Fradejas Moschino, Esther Pallarés, Jesús Alburquerque, María Del Mar Lluch Targarona, Jordi Mascaró Lamarca","doi":"10.1007/s00198-026-08219-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) was implemented to standardize secondary fracture prevention across an Integrated Health Area. Following a pilot usability study, a 1-year randomized trial compared the eHealth-supported FLS with usual care in adults aged ≥ years with surgically treated femur fragility fractures. Primary outcomes included refractures and hospital readmissions, while secondary outcomes assessed functional recovery, longitudinal osteoporosis treatment prescription, treatment adherence, mortality, and professional usability of the digital platform.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) improve secondary fracture prevention, but implementation remains heterogeneous and digital integration is limited. We evaluated the feasibility and clinical impact of a territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported FLS standardising post-fracture care across an Integrated Health Area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicentre pilot project comprised two phases: an initial study evaluating a web-based platform's technical performance and usability, followed by a prospective, open-label effectiveness study randomising 119 adults aged ≥65 years with surgically treated femur fragility fractures to an eHealth-supported FLS pathway (n = 60) or usual care (n = 59). Primary outcomes were refractures and hospital readmissions; secondary outcomes included functional recovery, treatment prescription, mortality and platform usability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were comparable, although the FLS group had a more favourable pre-fracture functional profile. Functional recovery was higher in the FLS group throughout follow-up, with significantly higher Barthel Index scores at 3, 6 and 12 months (80.1 vs. 61.2 at 12 months; P ≤ 0.01). Readmissions were similar and refractures infrequent, without significant differences. Osteoporosis treatment prescription was more sustained in the FLS group. All eight deaths occurred in the FLS group and none in control; given the small sample, this should not be read as a causal effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported FLS was feasible and was associated with better functional recovery and more sustained osteoporosis treatment prescription than usual care in the first year after femur fragility fracture. No significant differences were observed in refractures or readmissions; findings support further evaluation of digitally coordinated territorial FLS models in larger studies.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05266755, registered prospectively on 23 February 2022.</p>","PeriodicalId":520737,"journal":{"name":"Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-026-08219-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) was implemented to standardize secondary fracture prevention across an Integrated Health Area. Following a pilot usability study, a 1-year randomized trial compared the eHealth-supported FLS with usual care in adults aged ≥ years with surgically treated femur fragility fractures. Primary outcomes included refractures and hospital readmissions, while secondary outcomes assessed functional recovery, longitudinal osteoporosis treatment prescription, treatment adherence, mortality, and professional usability of the digital platform.

Purpose: Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) improve secondary fracture prevention, but implementation remains heterogeneous and digital integration is limited. We evaluated the feasibility and clinical impact of a territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported FLS standardising post-fracture care across an Integrated Health Area.

Methods: This multicentre pilot project comprised two phases: an initial study evaluating a web-based platform's technical performance and usability, followed by a prospective, open-label effectiveness study randomising 119 adults aged ≥65 years with surgically treated femur fragility fractures to an eHealth-supported FLS pathway (n = 60) or usual care (n = 59). Primary outcomes were refractures and hospital readmissions; secondary outcomes included functional recovery, treatment prescription, mortality and platform usability.

Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable, although the FLS group had a more favourable pre-fracture functional profile. Functional recovery was higher in the FLS group throughout follow-up, with significantly higher Barthel Index scores at 3, 6 and 12 months (80.1 vs. 61.2 at 12 months; P ≤ 0.01). Readmissions were similar and refractures infrequent, without significant differences. Osteoporosis treatment prescription was more sustained in the FLS group. All eight deaths occurred in the FLS group and none in control; given the small sample, this should not be read as a causal effect.

Conclusions: A territorially coordinated, eHealth-supported FLS was feasible and was associated with better functional recovery and more sustained osteoporosis treatment prescription than usual care in the first year after femur fragility fracture. No significant differences were observed in refractures or readmissions; findings support further evaluation of digitally coordinated territorial FLS models in larger studies.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05266755, registered prospectively on 23 February 2022.

股骨脆性骨折后区域协调、电子卫生支持的骨折联络服务:一项试点随机对照试验
实施了一项区域协调、电子卫生支持的骨折联络服务(FLS),以标准化整个综合卫生区域的二级骨折预防。在一项初步可用性研究之后,一项为期1年的随机试验比较了ehealth支持的FLS与常规护理对年龄≥1岁的手术治疗的股骨脆性骨折患者的影响。主要结果包括复发和再入院,而次要结果评估功能恢复、纵向骨质疏松治疗处方、治疗依从性、死亡率和数字平台的专业可用性。目的:裂缝联络服务(FLS)改善了二级裂缝预防,但实施仍然不统一,数字集成受到限制。我们评估了区域协调、电子卫生支持的FLS在综合卫生区域标准化骨折后护理的可行性和临床影响。方法:这个多中心试点项目包括两个阶段:一项初步研究评估基于网络平台的技术性能和可用性,随后是一项前瞻性、开放标签的有效性研究,随机选取119名年龄≥65岁、手术治疗过股骨脆性骨折的成年人,接受ehealth支持的FLS途径(n = 60)或常规护理(n = 59)。主要结局为复发和再入院;次要结局包括功能恢复、治疗处方、死亡率和平台可用性。结果:基线特征可比较,尽管FLS组具有更有利的骨折前功能概况。FLS组在整个随访过程中功能恢复更高,3、6、12个月时Barthel指数评分显著高于对照组(80.1比61.2,P≤0.01)。两组患者再入院相似,复发少见,无显著差异。FLS组骨质疏松治疗处方更持久。所有8例死亡均发生在FLS组,对照组无一例死亡;考虑到样本小,这不应该被解读为因果关系。结论:区域性协调、ehealth支持的FLS是可行的,并且在股骨脆性骨折后的第一年,与常规护理相比,FLS具有更好的功能恢复和更持久的骨质疏松治疗处方。复发和再入院方面无显著差异;研究结果支持在更大规模的研究中进一步评估数字协调的领土FLS模型。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05266755,预期于2022年2月23日注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书