METHOD: This was an observational study of adults aged 50 years and over admitted to hospital over 12 months with an acute vertebral fragility fracture. Information was collected from patients and electronic health records on their presentation and hospital care.

RESULTS: 90 patients were recruited into the study. 69% presented to hospital 24 h after the onset of their severe acute back pain. 38% had a concomitant medical diagnosis, such as an ongoing infection. X-ray of the spine was the most common imaging of choice to diagnose a fracture. There was variation in the content of the radiology reports. 46% or patients were managed on geriatric medicine wards, 39% on general medical wards, and followed by 14% on spinal surgical wards. Patients cared for by medical teams were older, frailer, had a higher prevalence of cognitive impairment, more dependent for daily living and less mobile compared to those under the care of the spinal surgical team. Many patients on medical wards had input from spinal surgical team and vice versa. 9% proceeded to have vertebral augmentation. Despite many in severe pain, only a third were prescribed opioids with the median dose of morphine-equivalent was 10-20 mg daily for the first three days of admission. While in hospital, 31% developed a medical complication, with infection being the most common one. On discharge, 76% still required opioids and only 56% had a plan for their bone health.

METHODS: A modified Delphi study was used. A total of 70 statements were presented, using an online platform, over three consensus-seeking rounds, to participants with experience in the hospital care of patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures from UK-based specialist societies. Participants rated the level of their agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined at 70% of respondents choosing either agree/strongly agree or disagree/strong disagree. Over the first two rounds, statements not reaching consensus were modified in subsequent rounds, and new statements proposed by participants and agreed by the research team could be added.

RESULTS: There were 71 participants in the first round, 37 in the second round and 28 (most of whom were geriatricians) in the third round. Consensus was reached in 52 statements covering fracture diagnosis, second-line imaging, organisation of hospital care, pain management and falls and bone health assessment. Consensus was not achieved for whether vertebral fragility fractures should be managed in a specific clinical area.

METHODS: 12-year observational study of a UK Fracture Liaison Service (outpatient secondary care setting). Database analyses of the records of adult outpatients aged 50 years and older with fragility fractures. Weather data were obtained from the UK's national Meteorological Office. In the seasonality analyses, we tested for the association between months and seasons (determinants), respectively, and outpatient attendances, by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test. In the meteorological analyses, the determinants were mean temperature, mean daily maximum and minimum temperature, number of days of rain, total rainfall and number of days of frost, per month, respectively. We explored the association of each meteorological variable with outpatient attendances, by regression models.

RESULTS: The Fracture Liaison Service recorded 25,454 fragility fractures. We found significant monthly and seasonal variation in attendances for fractures of the: radius or ulna; humerus; ankle, foot, tibia or fibula (ANOVA, all p-values <0.05). Fractures of the radius or ulna and humerus peaked in December and winter. Fractures of the ankle, foot, tibia or fibula peaked in July, August and summer. U-shaped associations were showed between each temperature parameter and fractures. Days of frost were directly associated with fractures of the radius or ulna (p-value <0.001) and humerus (p-value 0.002).

INTRODUCTION: This service improvement project aimed to improve detection of incidental vertebral fractures on routine imaging. It embedded a vertebral fracture identification service (Optasia Medical, OM) on routine computerised tomography (CT) scans performed in this hospital as part of its Fracture Liaison Service (FLS).

METHODS: The service was integrated into the hospital's CT workstream. Scans of patients aged ≥ 50 years for 3 months were prospectively retrieved, alongside their clinical history and the CT report. Fractures were identified via OM's machine learning algorithm and cross-checked by the OM radiologist. Fractures identified were then added as an addendum to the original CT report and the hospital FLS informed. The FLS made recommendations based on an agreed algorithm.

METHODS: Patients aged 50 years and over hospitalised with a vertebral fragility fracture from 1/2/2016 to 31/1/2017 were identified from radiology and hospital records. Patients sustaining vertebral fractures due to either major trauma or malignancy were excluded. Data was collected on patient demographics, fracture details, hospitalisation details and health outcomes.

RESULTS: 208 patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures were hospitalised over a 12 month period. The mean (SD) age was 80.5 (11) years, of which 68% were female. 94% presented to the Emergency Department (ED) as their first point of contact, of which 70% were subsequently hospitalised. Two-thirds presented with a single level vertebral fracture predominantly around the thoracolumbar region. The majority (87%) were non-operatively managed by general physicians, of which most were under Geriatric Medicine. The median length of stay was 12 (IQR 6-20) days and inpatient mortality was 3%. 52% of patients went on to have a bone health assessment.

PURPOSE: Many countries implemented a lockdown to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored whether outpatient attendances to the Fracture Clinic for non-hip fragility fracture and inpatient admissions for hip fracture declined during lockdown, among adults aged 50 years and older, in a large secondary care hospital.

METHODS: In our observational study, we analysed the records of 6681 outpatients attending the Fracture Clinic, for non-hip fragility fractures, and those of 1752 inpatients, admitted for hip fracture, during the time frames of interest. These were weeks 1st to 12th in 2020 ("prior to lockdown"), weeks 13th to 19th in 2020 ("lockdown") and corresponding periods over 2015 to 2019. We tested for differences in mean numbers (standard deviation (SD)) of outpatients and inpatients, respectively, per week, during the time frames of interest, across the years.

RESULTS: Prior to lockdown, in 2020, 63.1 (SD 12.6) outpatients per week attended the Fracture Clinic, similar to previous years (p value 0.338). During lockdown, 26.0 (SD 7.3) outpatients per week attended the Fracture Clinic, fewer than previous years (p value < 0.001); similar findings were observed in both sexes and age groups (all p values < 0.001). During lockdown, 16.1 (SD 5.6) inpatients per week were admitted for hip fracture, similar to previous years (p value 0.776).

Methods: We interviewed 14 participants about their experience in the assessment and treatment of patients presenting with pubic rami fragility fractures. Data was analyzed using an inductive thematic approach.

Results: The majority of patients presenting with a pubic rami fragility fracture were managed by geriatricians. However, many of the geriatricians were not aware that these fractures have a high association with co-existing sacral fragility fractures. Furthermore, they were not aware of the limitations of standard x-ray imaging, nor of the potential benefits of surgical intervention for sacral fragility fractures. Spinal surgeons recommended that early, more specialist imaging in patients with pubic rami fragility fractures failing to mobilize, would change clinical management, if found to have a coexisting sacral fragility fracture, amenable to surgical intervention.

DESIGN: Single-site, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled feasibility trial.

SETTING: A UK tertiary centre hospital.

PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥70 years who were ambulating pre-injury requiring hospital admission (within 28 days of injury) with a type 1 lateral compression PFF.

INTERVENTIONS: The intervention group received sacral fracture fixation (cement augmentation±screw fixation) within 7 days of randomisation. Routine preoperative and postoperative care followed each surgical intervention. The control group received usual care consisting of analgesia, and regular input from the medical and therapy team.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The feasibility outcomes were the number of eligible patients, willingness to be randomised, adherence to allocated treatment, retention, data on the completeness and variability of the proposed definitive trial outcome measures, and reported adverse events.

RESULTS: 241 patients were screened. 13 (5.4%) were deemed eligible to participate. Among the eligible participants, nine (69.2%) were willing to participate. Five participants were randomised to the intervention group and four to the control group. The clinicians involved were willing to allow their patients to be randomised and adhere to the allocated treatment. One participant in the intervention group and two participants in the control group received their allocated treatment. All participants were followed up until 12 weeks post-randomisation, and had an additional safety follow-up assessment at 12 months. Overall, the proportion of completeness of outcome measures was at least 75%. No adverse events were directly related to the trial.

CONCLUSIONS: There were significant challenges in recruiting sufficient participants which will need to be addressed prior to a definitive trial.

DESIGN: A systematic review of primary qualitative studies. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 2019. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of full-articles selected for inclusion were performed independently by two authors. A framework synthesis was applied to extracted data based on the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). The TFA includes seven domains relating to sense-making, emotions, opportunity costs, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality and self-efficacy. Confidence in synthesis findings was assessed.

SETTING: Any developed country healthcare setting.

PARTICIPANTS: Patients, healthcare professionals, managers, payers and academics.

INTERVENTION: Experiences and views of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates.

RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included, mostly describing perceptions of oral bisphosphonates. We identified, with high confidence, how patients and healthcare professionals make sense (coherence) of bisphosphonates by balancing perceptions of need against concerns, how uncertainty prevails about bisphosphonate perceived effectiveness and a number of individual and service factors that have potential to increase self-efficacy in recommending and adhering to bisphosphonates. We identified, with moderate confidence, that bisphosphonate taking induces concern, but has the potential to engender reassurance, and that both side effects and special instructions for taking oral bisphosphonates can result in treatment burden. Finally, we identified with low confidence that multimorbidity plays a role in people's perception of bisphosphonate acceptability.

CONCLUSION: By using the lens of acceptability, our findings demonstrate with high confidence that a theoretically informed, whole-system approach is necessary to both understand and improve adherence. Clinicians and patients need supporting to understand the need for bisphosphonates, and clinicians need to clarify to patients what constitutes bisphosphonate treatment success. Further research is needed to explore perspectives of male patients and those with multimorbidity receiving bisphosphonates, and patients receiving intravenous treatment.