Displaying all 8 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Yong EL, Ganesan G, Kramer MS, Logan S, Lau TC, Cauley JA, et al.
    Osteoporos Int, 2019 Apr;30(4):879-886.
    PMID: 30671610 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-019-04839-5
    Despite an increase in absolute numbers, the age-standardized incidence of hip fractures in Singapore declined in the period 2000 to 2017. Among the three major ethnic groups, Chinese women had the highest fracture rates but were the only group to show a temporal decline.

    INTRODUCTION: A study published in 2001 predicted a 30-50% increase in Singapore hip fracture incidence rates over the ensuing 30 years. To test that prediction, we examined the incidence of hip fracture in Singapore from 2000 to 2017.

    METHODS: We carried out a population-based study of hip fractures among Singapore residents aged ≥ 50 years. National medical insurance claims data were used to identify admissions with a primary discharge diagnosis of hip fracture. Age-adjusted rates, based on the age distribution of the Singapore population of 2000, were analyzed separately by sex and ethnicity (Chinese, Malay, or Indian).

    RESULTS: Over the 18-year study period, 36,082 first hip fractures were recorded. Total hip fracture admissions increased from 1487 to 2729 fractures/year in the years 2000 to 2017. Despite this absolute increase, age-adjusted fracture rates declined, with an average annual change of - 4.3 (95% CI - 5.0, - 3.5) and - 1.1 (95% CI - 1.7, - 0.5) fractures/100,000/year for women and men respectively. Chinese women had 1.4- and 1.9-fold higher age-adjusted rates than Malay and Indian women: 264 (95% CI 260, 267) versus 185 (95% CI 176, 193) and 141 (95% CI 132, 150) fractures/100,000/year, respectively. Despite their higher fracture rates, Chinese women were the only ethnic group exhibiting a decline, most evident in those ≥ 85 years, in age-adjusted fracture rate of - 5.3 (95% CI - 6.0, - 4.5) fractures/100,000/year.

    CONCLUSION: Although the absolute number of fractures increased, steep drops in elderly Chinese women drove a reduction in overall age-adjusted hip fracture rates. Increases in the older population will lead to a rise in total number of hip fractures, requiring budgetary planning and new preventive strategies.

  2. Ebeling PR, Chan DC, Lau TC, Lee JK, Songpatanasilp T, Wong SH, et al.
    Osteoporos Int, 2020 May;31(5):805-826.
    PMID: 31788717 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-019-05197-y
    The Asia -Pacific Bone Academy (APBA) Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) Focus Group educational initiative has stimulated activity across the Asia -Pacific region with the intention of supporting widespread implementation of new FLS. In 2017, the APBA FLS Focus Group developed a suite of tools to support implementation of FLS across the Asia-Pacific region as a component of a multi-faceted educational initiative. This article puts this initiative into context with a narrative review describing the burden of fragility fractures in the region, the current secondary fracture prevention care gap and a summary of emerging best practice. The results of a survey to evaluate the impact of the APBA educational initiative is presented, in addition to commentary on recent activities intended to improve the care of individuals who sustain fragility fractures across the Asia -Pacific. A FLS Toolbox for Asia-Pacific was developed which included the following sections:1. The burden of fragility fractures in the Asia-Pacific region.2. A summary of evidence for FLS in the Asia-Pacific.3. A generic, fully referenced FLS business plan template.4. Potential cost savings accrued by each country, based on a country-specific FLS Benefits Calculator.5. How to start and expand FLS programmes in the Asia-Pacific context.6. A step-by-step guide to setting up FLS in countries in the Asia-Pacific region.7. Other practical tools to support FLS establishment.8. FLS online resources and publications.The FLS Toolbox was provided as a resource to support FLS workshops immediately following the 5th Scientific Meeting of the Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies (AFOS) held in Kuala Lumpur in October 2017. The FLS workshops addressed three key themes:• The FLS business case.• Planning the FLS patient pathway.• The role of the FLS coordinator in fragility fracture care management.A follow-up survey of 142 FLS workshop participants was conducted in August-September 2018. The survey included questions regarding how FLS were developed, funded, the scope of service provision and the support provided by the educational initiative. Almost one-third (30.3%) of FLS workshop participants completed the survey. Survey responses were reported for those who had established a FLS at the time the survey was conducted and, separately, for those who had not established a FLS. Findings for those who had established a FLS included:• 78.3% of respondents established a multidisciplinary team to develop the business case for their FLS.• 87.0% of respondents stated that a multidisciplinary team was established to design the patient pathway for their FLS.• 26.1% of respondents stated that their FLS has sustainable funding.• The primary source of funding for FLS was from public hospitals (83.3%) as compared with private hospitals (16.7%).Most hospitals that had not established a FLS at the time the survey was conducted were either in the process of setting-up a FLS (47%) or had plans in place to establish a FLS for which approval is being sought (29%). The primary barrier to establishing a new FLS was lack of sustainable funding. The APBA FLS Focus Group educational initiative has stimulated activity across the Asia-Pacific region with the intention of supporting widespread implementation of new FLS. A second edition of the FLS Toolbox is in development which is intended to complement ongoing efforts throughout the region to expedite widespread implementation of FLS.
  3. Chopra A, Lin HY, Navarra SV, Saeed MA, Sockalingam S, Thongpooswan S, et al.
    Int J Rheum Dis, 2021 Sep;24(9):1106-1111.
    PMID: 34375036 DOI: 10.1111/1756-185X.14185
    Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a major health burden in Asia Pacific affecting the quality of life of patients and consuming healthcare resources. According to recent estimates from the World Health Organization-International League Against Rheumatism-Community Oriented Program for Control of Rheumatic Diseases, prevalence is around 0.3%-0.5%. Management guidelines have helped to improve treatment across this diverse region. To gain better insight into current real-world management applications in view of these guidelines, virtual meetings were conducted in mid-2020 to explore perspectives of rheumatologists and patients, as well as discuss the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on RA management. Patients and rheumatologists from Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Thailand, India, Pakistan, and Taiwan were included, representing a diverse mix of healthcare systems, wealth, ethnicity and culture. Despite many countries having prospered in recent years, similar challenges in RA diagnosis and treatment were identified. The daily impact and patient experience of RA were also similar across countries, marked by "silent" pain and disability, and universal misunderstanding of the disease. Late diagnosis and treatment, and barriers to access to appropriate treatment, remain problematic. The experience shared by Taiwan offers a glimmer of hope, however, wherein patient advocacy groups have succeeded in being included in policy-making decisions and securing access to advanced treatment. Real-world solutions that pay heed to the unique local needs and diversity of Asia Pacific are required to improve RA management, which will take time. In the interim, help can be sought from the trained, non-rheumatologist community to reduce some of the disease burden.
  4. Chandran M, Mitchell PJ, Amphansap T, Bhadada SK, Chadha M, Chan DC, et al.
    Osteoporos Int, 2021 Jul;32(7):1249-1275.
    PMID: 33502559 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05742-0
    Guidelines for doctors managing osteoporosis in the Asia-Pacific region vary widely. We compared 18 guidelines for similarities and differences in five key areas. We then used a structured consensus process to develop clinical standards of care for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis and for improving the quality of care.

    PURPOSE: Minimum clinical standards for assessment and management of osteoporosis are needed in the Asia-Pacific (AP) region to inform clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to improve osteoporosis care. We present the framework of these clinical standards and describe its development.

    METHODS: We conducted a structured comparative analysis of existing CPGs in the AP region using a "5IQ" model (identification, investigation, information, intervention, integration, and quality). One-hundred data elements were extracted from each guideline. We then employed a four-round Delphi consensus process to structure the framework, identify key components of guidance, and develop clinical care standards.

    RESULTS: Eighteen guidelines were included. The 5IQ analysis demonstrated marked heterogeneity, notably in guidance on risk factors, the use of biochemical markers, self-care information for patients, indications for osteoporosis treatment, use of fracture risk assessment tools, and protocols for monitoring treatment. There was minimal guidance on long-term management plans or on strategies and systems for clinical quality improvement. Twenty-nine APCO members participated in the Delphi process, resulting in consensus on 16 clinical standards, with levels of attainment defined for those on identification and investigation of fragility fractures, vertebral fracture assessment, and inclusion of quality metrics in guidelines.

    CONCLUSION: The 5IQ analysis confirmed previous anecdotal observations of marked heterogeneity of osteoporosis clinical guidelines in the AP region. The Framework provides practical, clear, and feasible recommendations for osteoporosis care and can be adapted for use in other such vastly diverse regions. Implementation of the standards is expected to significantly lessen the global burden of osteoporosis.

  5. Chan DD, Chang LY, Akesson KE, Mitchell P, Chen CH, Lewiecki EM, et al.
    Arch Osteoporos, 2018 05 12;13(1):59.
    PMID: 29754189 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-018-0463-3
    The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) Consensus Meeting endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF), Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies (AFOS), and Asia Pacific Osteoporosis Foundation (APOF) was hosted by the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association on October 14, 2017. International and domestic experts reviewed the 13 Best Practice Framework (BPF) standards and concluded that all standards were generally applicable in the Asia-Pacific region and needed only minor modifications to fit the healthcare settings in the region.

    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.

  6. Chan DD, Chang LY, Akesson KE, Mitchell P, Chen CH, Lewiecki EM, et al.
    Arch Osteoporos, 2018 07 03;13(1):73.
    PMID: 29971507 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-018-0485-x
    In this article the name of the sixth author, E. Michael Lewiecki was rendered incorrectly. The publisher regrets this error and apologizes for the inconvenience caused.
  7. Thumboo J, Fong KY, Chng HH, Koh ET, Chia HP, Leong KH, et al.
    J Rheumatol, 1998 Jul;25(7):1299-304.
    PMID: 9676760
    OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of ethnicity on disease manifestations in Oriental patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and to describe the risk of developing renal or central nervous system (CNS) involvement with time.
    METHODS: A retrospective study of 472 patients with SLE seen at the only Rheumatology Unit in Singapore. The effect of ethnicity on selected disease manifestations at diagnosis was assessed after adjusting for demographic variables using multiple logistic regression. The probability of developing selected disease manifestations with time was determined using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method.
    RESULTS: At diagnosis, Malays had a higher risk of renal or CNS involvement than Chinese (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.21, and OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 9.34, respectively), and Indians a lower risk of malar rash and a higher risk of oral ulcers than Chinese (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.68, and OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.45 to 7.34, respectively). The prevalence of renal or CNS involvement in the entire cohort increased with time, reaching 75.6% (95% CI 66.1% to 85.0%) and 16.7% (95% CI 11.7% to 21.6%), respectively, after 18 years of disease.
    CONCLUSION: Ethnicity influenced disease manifestations at diagnosis in this cohort of Oriental patients with SLE. Renal or CNS involvement developed in previously unaffected patients up to 18 years after diagnosis, highlighting the need for continued vigilance in patients with lupus.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links