Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Osteoporosis International
Published in: Osteoporosis International 1/2019

01-01-2019 | Original Article

Osteoporosis prevention: where are the barriers to improvement in a French general population? A qualitative study

Authors: B. Merle, C. Dupraz, J. Haesebaert, L. Barraud, M. Aussedat, C. Motteau, V. Simon, A.M. Schott, M. Flori

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Summary

We conducted a qualitative study with French men and women in order to provide insight into individuals’ experiences, behaviors, and perceptions about osteoporosis (OP) and OP care. The data showed that both sexes, but especially men, were unfamiliar with OP, did not always feel concerned, and mistrusted pharmacological treatments.

Introduction

To engage actively in osteoporosis (OP) prevention, people need to have basic knowledge about the disease. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore knowledge and representations of OP care and prevention among both men and women.

Methods

Focus groups were conducted in the Rhône-Alpes Region, France, with women aged 50–85 years and men aged 60–85 years, with or without a history of fragility fracture and/or an OP diagnosis (respectively referred to as “aware” or “unaware”). A total of 45 women (23 “aware” and 22 “unaware” in 5 and 4 focus groups, respectively) and 53 men (19 “aware” and 34 “unaware” in 3 and 4 focus groups, respectively) were included. A thematic analysis of transcripts was performed to explore knowledge and representations about OP, risk factors, prevention, and treatment.

Results

The data showed that both sexes, but especially men, had limited knowledge of OP and considered it as a natural aging process not related to fragility fractures. They generally did not feel concerned by OP and no important difference was observed between “aware” and “unaware” patients. Women expressed their fear of the disease, associated with aging and the end of life, while men considered it to be a women’s disease only. Both sexes were aware of OP risk factors, but were suspicious towards treatments because of the associated side effects.

Conclusion

Understanding people’s representation of OP might help to provide patients with relevant information in order to optimize their preventive behavior and decrease the burden of the disease.
Literature
1.
Kanis JA, Melton LJ 3rd, Christiansen C, Johnston CC, Khaltaev N (1994) The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 9:1137–1141CrossRef
2.
Strom O, Borgstrom F, Kanis JA, Compston J, Cooper C, McCloskey EV, Jonsson B (2011) Osteoporosis: burden, health care provision and opportunities in the EU: a report prepared in collaboration with the international Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 6:59–155CrossRef
3.
Hernlund E, Svedbom A, Ivergard M, Compston J, Cooper C, Stenmark J, McCloskey EV, Jonsson B, Kanis JA (2013) Osteoporosis in the European Union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden. A report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 8:136CrossRef
4.
Svedbom A, Hernlund E, Ivergard M, Compston J, Cooper C, Stenmark J, McCloskey EV, Jonsson B, Kanis JA, EURPo IOF (2013) Osteoporosis in the European Union: a compendium of country-specific reports. Arch Osteoporos 8:137CrossRef
5.
Maravic M, Taupin P, Landais P, Roux C (2011) Change in hip fracture incidence over the last 6 years in France. Osteoporos Int 22:797–801CrossRef
6.
Briot K, Cortet B, Thomas T et al (2012) 2012 update of French guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Joint Bone Spine 79:304–313CrossRef
7.
Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, Cooper C, Rizzoli R, Reginster JY, Scientific Advisory Board of the European Society for C, Economic Aspects of O, Osteoarthritis, the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis F (2013) European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 24:23–57CrossRef
8.
Ganda K, Puech M, Chen JS, Speerin R, Bleasel J, Center JR, Eisman JA, March L, Seibel MJ (2013) Models of care for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 24:393–406CrossRef
9.
Mitchell PJ (2013) Best practices in secondary fracture prevention: fracture liaison services. Curr Osteoporos Rep 11:52–60CrossRef
10.
Nayak S, Greenspan SL (2018) How can we improve osteoporosis care? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of quality improvement strategies for osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 33:1585–1594CrossRef
11.
Leslie WD, Giangregorio LM, Yogendran M, Azimaee M, Morin S, Metge C, Caetano P, Lix LM (2012) A population-based analysis of the post-fracture care gap 1996–2008: the situation is not improving. Osteoporos Int 23:1623–1629CrossRef
12.
Giangregorio L, Papaioannou A, Cranney A, Zytaruk N, Adachi JD (2006) Fragility fractures and the osteoporosis care gap: an international phenomenon. Semin Arthritis Rheum 35:293–305CrossRef
13.
Cheng N, Green ME (2008) Osteoporosis screening for men: are family physicians following the guidelines? Can Fam Physician 54:1140–1141 1141 e1141–1145PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Giangregorio L, Papaioannou A, Thabane L, DeBeer J, Cranney A, Dolovich L, Adili A, Adachi JD (2008) Do patients perceive a link between a fragility fracture and osteoporosis? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:38CrossRef
15.
Sale JE, Beaton DE, Sujic R, Bogoch ER (2010) ‘If it was osteoporosis, I would have really hurt myself.’ Ambiguity about osteoporosis and osteoporosis care despite a screening programme to educate fragility fracture patients. J Eval Clin Pract 16:590–596PubMed
16.
Malochet-Guinamand S, Chalard N, Billault C, Breuil N, Ristori JM, Schmidt J (2005) Osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal women after peripheral fractures: impact of information to general practitioners. Joint Bone Spine 72:562–566CrossRef
17.
Alami S, Hervouet L, Poiraudeau S, Briot K, Roux C (2016) Barriers to effective postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment: a qualitative study of patients’ and practitioners’ views. PLoS One 11:e0158365CrossRef
18.
Weston JM, Norris EV, Clark EM (2011) The invisible disease: making sense of an osteoporosis diagnosis in older age. Qual Health Res 21:1692–1704CrossRef
19.
Kitzinger J (1995) Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ 311:299–302CrossRef
20.
Merle B, Chapurlat R, Vignot E, Thomas T, Haesebaert J, Schott AM (2017) Post-fracture care: do we need to educate patients rather than doctors? The PREVOST randomized controlled trial. Osteoporos Int 28:1549–1558CrossRef
21.
Chaitou A, Boutroy S, Vilayphiou N, Munoz F, Delmas PD, Chapurlat R, Szulc P (2010) Association between bone turnover rate and bone microarchitecture in men: the STRAMBO study. J Bone Miner Res 25:2313–2323CrossRef
22.
Lau E, Papaioannou A, Dolovich L, Adachi J, Sawka AM, Burns S, Nair K, Pathak A (2008) Patients’ adherence to osteoporosis therapy: exploring the perceptions of postmenopausal women. Can Fam Physician 54:394–402PubMed
23.
Barker KL, Toye F, Lowe CJ (2016) A qualitative systematic review of patients’ experience of osteoporosis using meta-ethnography. Arch Osteoporos 11:33CrossRef
24.
Baheiraei A, Ritchie JE, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2006) Exploring factors influencing osteoporosis prevention and control: a qualitative study of Iranian men and women in Australia. Maturitas 54:127–134CrossRef
25.
Besser SJ, Anderson JE, Weinman J (2012) How do osteoporosis patients perceive their illness and treatment? Implications for clinical practice. Arch Osteoporos 7:115–124CrossRef
26.
Sale JE, Gignac MA, Frankel L, Hawker G, Beaton D, Elliot-Gibson V, Bogoch E (2012) Patients reject the concept of fragility fracture--a new understanding based on fracture patients communication. Osteoporos Int 23:2829–2834CrossRef
27.
Gaines JM, Marx KA (2011) Older men’s knowledge about osteoporosis and educational interventions to increase osteoporosis knowledge in older men: a systematic review. Maturitas 68:5–12CrossRef
28.
Solimeo SL (2011) Living with a ‘women’s disease’: risk appraisal and management among men with osteoporosis. J Mens Health 8:185–191CrossRef
29.
Solimeo SL, Weber TJ, Gold DT (2011) Older men’s explanatory model for osteoporosis. Gerontologist 51:530–539CrossRef
30.
Banu J (2013) Causes, consequences, and treatment of osteoporosis in men. Drug Des Devel Ther 7:849–860CrossRef
31.
Leventhal H, Benyamini Y, Brownlee S, Diefenbach M, Leventhal EA, Patrick-Miller L, Robitaille C (1997) Illness representations: theoretical foundations. In: Petrie KJ, Weinman JA (eds) Perceptions of health and illness. Harwood Academic, Amsterdam, pp 19–45
32.
Reventlow SD, Hvas L, Malterud K (2006) Making the invisible body visible. Bone scans, osteoporosis and women’s bodily experiences. Soc Sci Med 62:2720–2731CrossRef
33.
Reventlow SD (2007) Perceived risk of osteoporosis: restricted physical activities? Qualitative interview study with women in their sixties. Scand J Prim Health Care 25:160–165CrossRef
34.
Fogelman Y, Goldshtein I, Segal E, Ish-Shalom S (2016) Managing osteoporosis: a survey of knowledge, attitudes and practices among primary care physicians in Israel. PLoS One 11:e0160661CrossRef
35.
Iversen MD, Vora RR, Servi A, Solomon DH (2011) Factors affecting adherence to osteoporosis medications: a focus group approach examining viewpoints of patients and providers. J Geriatr Phys Ther 34:72–81CrossRef
36.
Yu J, Brenneman SK, Sazonov V, Modi A (2015) Reasons for not initiating osteoporosis therapy among a managed care population. Patient Prefer Adherence 9:821–830PubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Lindsay BR, Olufade T, Bauer J, Babrowicz J, Hahn R (2016) Patient-reported barriers to osteoporosis therapy. Arch Osteoporos 11:19CrossRef
38.
Crawford Shearer NB (2009) Health empowerment theory as a guide for practice. Geriatr Nurs 30:4–10CrossRef
39.
Nielsen D, Huniche L, Brixen K, Sahota O, Masud T (2013) Handling knowledge on osteoporosis--a qualitative study. Scand J Caring Sci 27:516–524CrossRef
40.
Meadows LM, Mrkonjic L, Lagendyk L (2005) Women’s perceptions of future risk after low-energy fractures at midlife. Ann Fam Med 3:64–69CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Osteoporosis prevention: where are the barriers to improvement in a French general population? A qualitative study
Authors
B. Merle
C. Dupraz
J. Haesebaert
L. Barraud
M. Aussedat
C. Motteau
V. Simon
A.M. Schott
M. Flori
Publication date
01-01-2019
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Osteoporosis International / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-018-4720-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Osteoporosis International 1/2019 Go to the issue

Original Article

Length of hospital stay after hip fracture surgery and 1-year mortality

Original Article

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw after tooth extraction in cancer patients: a multicenter retrospective study

Original Article

Patients with prostate cancer and androgen deprivation therapy have increased risk of fractures—a study from the fractures and fall injuries in the elderly cohort (FRAILCO)

Original Article

Adherence to osteoporosis therapy after an upper extremity fracture: a pre-specified substudy of the C-STOP randomized controlled trial

Original Article

Impact of mild and moderate/severe vertebral fractures on physical activity: a prospective study of older women in the UK

Original Article

Trabecular microstructure is influenced by race and sex in Black and White young adults