• 1

    Holloway KL, Henry MJ, Brennan-Olsen SL, et al: Non-hip and non-vertebral fractures: the neglected fracture sites. Osteoporos Int 27: 905, 2016.

  • 2

    Melton LJ, Atkinson EJ, Oconnor MK, et al: Bone density and fracture risk in men. J Bone Miner Res 13: 1915, 1998.

  • 3

    Hernlund E, Svedbom A, Ivergård M, et al: 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: 136, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Greenspan SL, Wyman A, Hooven FH, et al: Predictors of treatment with osteoporosis medications after recent fragility fractures in a multinational cohort of postmenopausal women. J Am Geriatr Soc 60: 455, 2012.

    • Crossref
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Marsh D, Åkesson K, Beaton DE, et al: Coordinator-based systems for secondary prevention in fragility fracture patients. Osteoporos Int 22: 2051, 2011.

  • 6

    Huntjens KM, Geel TA, Bergh JP, et al: Fracture liaison service. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96: e29, 2014.

  • 7

    Lane NE: Epidemiology, etiology, and diagnosis of osteoporosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194(suppl): S3, 2006.

  • 8

    Labovitz JM, Revill K: Osteoporosis: pathogenesis, new therapies and surgical implications. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 24: 311, 2007.

  • 9

    van Geel TA, Huntjens KM, van den Bergh JP, et al: Timing of subsequent fractures after an initial fracture. Curr Osteoporos Rep 8: 118, 2010.

  • 10

    Geel TA, Helden SV, Geusens PP, et al: Clinical subsequent fractures cluster in time after first fractures. Ann Rheum Dis 68: 99, 2008.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Center JR, Bliuc D, Nguyen TV, et al: Risk of subsequent fracture after low-trauma fracture in men and women. JAMA 297: 387, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Huntjens KM, Kosar S, Geel TA, et al: Risk of subsequent fracture and mortality within 5 years after a non-vertebral fracture. Osteoporos Int 21: 2075, 2010.

  • 13

    Helden SV, Cals J, Kessels F, et al: Risk of new clinical fractures within 2 years following a fracture. Osteoporos Int 17: 348, 2005.

  • 14

    Lih A, Nandapalan H, Kim M, et al: Targeted intervention reduces refracture rates in patients with incident non-vertebral osteoporotic fractures: a 4-year prospective controlled study. Osteoporos Int 22: 849, 2010.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Wu CH, Kao IJ, Hung WC, et al: Economic impact and cost-effectiveness of fracture liaison services: a systematic review of the literature. Osteoporos Int 29: 1227, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Majumdar SR, Lier DA, Beaupre LA, et al: Osteoporosis case manager for patients with hip fractures. Arch Intern Med 169: 25, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Briot K: Fracture liaison services. Curr Opin Rheumatol 29: 416, 2017.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Walsh TP, Ferris LR, Cullen NC, et al: The integration of a podiatrist into an orthopaedic department: a cost-consequences analysis. J Foot Ankle Res 10: 44, 2017.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Eiff MP, Saultz JW: Fracture care by family physicians. J Am Board Fam Pract 6: 179, 1993.

  • 20

    Newton MT, Archer JA, Scruggs M, et al: Low bone mass and fractures on foot radiographs: missed opportunities to evaluate for osteoporosis. JAPMA 99: 1, 2009.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Christman RA: “Systematic Evaluation of Bone and Joint Abnormalities,” in Foot and Ankle Radiology, Second Edition, edited by RA Christman, p 179, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, 2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Integration of Podiatric Medicine Within the Fracture Liaison Services Model

Tyler MacRae Western University of Health Sciences, Brea, CA.

Search for other papers by Tyler MacRae in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS
and
David W. Shofler Western University of Health Sciences, College of Podiatric Medicine, Pomona, CA.

Search for other papers by David W. Shofler in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DPM, MSHS
Restricted access

Underlying bone metabolic disorders are often neglected when managing acute fractures. The term fracture liaison services (FLS) refers to models of care with the designated responsibility of comprehensive fracture management, including the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis. Although there is evidence of the effectiveness of FLS in reducing health-care costs and improving patient outcomes, podiatric practitioners are notably absent from described FLS models. The integration of podiatric practitioners into FLS programs may lead to improved patient care and further reduce associated health-care costs.

Corresponding author: Tyler MacRae, BS, Western University of Health Sciences, 1350 La Serena Dr, Brea, CA 92821. (E-mail: tylermacrae0@gmail.com)