Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FRANCIS, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by TORGERSON, D. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FRANCIS, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by TORGERSON, D. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1995 British Society for Rheumatology

research-article

A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS AND COST OF TREATMENT FOR VERTEBRAL FRACTURES IN WOMEN

R. M. FRANCIS*,, F. H. ANDERSON* and D. J. TORGERSON{dagger}

*Musculoskeletal Unit, Freeman Hospital Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN
{dagger}Centre for Health Economics, University of York Heslington, York YO1 5DD

Correspondence to: Correspondence to: R. M. Francis, Musculoskeletal Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN.

Of the treatments available for the management of established vertebral osteoporosis, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), intermittent cyclical etidronate therapy and salmon calcitonin have been shown in randomized, controlled trials to reduce the risk of further vertebral fractures. In order to compare the cost effectiveness of these different treatments we examined the cost and efficacy of each treatment using previously published data. HRT, cyclical etidronate and salmon calcitonin all decrease the incidence of further vertebral fracture by 50–60%. Estimation of the cost per vertebral fracture averted therefore reflects the underlying cost of medication, with HRT costing £138–680 per fracture averted compared with £1880 for cyclical etidronate therapy and £9075–25013 for salmon calcitonin therapy. HRT is therefore the treatment of choice for post-menopausal women with osteoporosis, particularly as it may also decrease the risk of ischaemic heart disease. Although salmon calcitonin appears as effective as the other treatments, it is considerably more expensive, so should be reserved for situations where HRT and cyclical etidronate are inappropriate.

KEY WORDS: Osteoporosis, Vertebral fracture, Cost effectiveness, Hormone replacement therapy, Etidronate, Calcitonin


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 QJMHome page
R. Eastell, D.M. Reid, J. Compston, C. Cooper, I. Fogelman, R.M. Francis, S.M. Hay, D.J. Hosking, D.W. Purdie, S.H. Ralston, et al.
Secondary prevention of osteoporosis: when should a non-vertebral fracture be a trigger for action?
QJM, November 1, 2001; 94(11): 575 - 597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.