PURPOSE: To review and generate consensus on best practices of fracture liaison service (FLS) in the Asia-Pacific (AP) region.
METHODS: In October 2017, the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association (TOA) invited experts from the AP region (n = 23), the Capture the Fracture Steering Committee (n = 2), and the USA (n = 1) to join the AP region FLS Consensus Meeting in Taipei. After two rounds of consensus generation, the recommendations on the 13 Best Practice Framework (BPF) standards were reported and reviewed by the attendees. Experts unable to attend the on-site meeting reviewed the draft, made suggestions, and approved the final version.
RESULTS: Because the number of FLSs in the region is rapidly increasing, experts agreed that it was timely to establish consensus on benchmark quality standards for FLSs in the region. They also agreed that the 13 BPF standards and the 3 levels of standards were generally applicable, but that some clarifications were necessary. They suggested, for example, that patient and family education be incorporated into the current standards and that communication with the public to promote FLSs be increased.
CONCLUSIONS: The consensus on the 13 BPF standards reviewed in this meeting was that they were generally applicable and required only a few advanced clarifications to increase the quality of FLSs in the region.
INTRODUCTION: The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2019. This manuscript seeks to apply this in an international setting, taking additional account of further categorisation of increased risk of fracture, which may inform choice of therapeutic approach.
METHODS: Clinical perspective and updated literature search.
RESULTS: The following areas are reviewed: categorisation of fracture risk and general pharmacological management of osteoporosis.
CONCLUSIONS: A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use to characterise fracture risk and direct interventions.
METHOD: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Web of sciences were investigated to identify relevant articles up to June 2019. The search strategy combined the Medical Subject Heading and Title and/or abstract keywords. The combined effect sizes were calculated as weight mean difference (WMD) using the random-effects model. Between study heterogeneity was evaluated by the Cochran's Q test and I2.
RESULTS: Four RCTs studies investigated Carnosine use versus any control for at least 2 weeks were identified and analyzed. Overall results from the random-effects model on included studies, with 184 participants, indicated that carnosine intervention reduced HbA1C levels in intervention vs control groups (WMD: -0.92 %, 95 % CI: -1.20, -0.63, I2:69 %). Four studies, including a total of 183 participants, reported TG changes as an outcome measure variable, but combined results did not show significant reduction in this outcome (WMD: -14.46 mg/dl, 95 % CI: -29.11, 0.19, I2:94 %). Furthermore, combined results did not show any significant change in HOMA-IR, Cholesterol, fasting blood sugar, or HDL-C.
CONCLUSION: Carnosine supplementation results in a decrease in HbA1C, but elicits no effect on HOMA-IR, Cholesterol, fasting blood sugar, TG and HDL-C. Future studies with a larger sample sizes, varied doses of carnosine, and population-specific sub-groups are warranted to confirm, and enhance, the veracity of our findings.