Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 26 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYCureus

Management, Practice, and Outcomes of Fragility Fractures and Osteoporosis Care at a Tertiary Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

  1. 1College of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, SAU.
  2. 2Family Medicine and Primary Care, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, SAU.
  3. 3Internal Medicine, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, SAU.

Abstract

Introduction and objectives Fragility fractures are sentinel events for osteoporosis, yet secondary prevention remains underused, and chronological age alone may not capture the physiological vulnerability that shapes post-fracture outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate osteoporosis-related care after fragility fracture and its association with frailty in adults hospitalized with fragility fractures in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, electronic health records (EHRs) were reviewed for 301 adults admitted with fragility fractures at a tertiary hospital in Riyadh in 2024 (mean (SD) age, 72.8 (11.2) years; 52.2% women). Frailty was quantified using a cumulative deficit index built from 24 clinical, functional, and laboratory variables and categorized into quartile-based groups. Primary outcomes were prolonged hospitalization (>20 days) and mortality; secondary outcomes were unplanned readmission and refracture within one year. Results Anti-osteoporosis therapy was initiated during hospitalization in 8/301 patients (2.7%) and prescribed at discharge to 12/301 patients (4.0%); only 29 patients (9.6%) underwent follow-up bone mineral density (BMD) testing within one year. Out of 301 patients, 99 (32.9%) were classified as fit (frailty index (FI) ≤0.174), 63 (20.9%) as mildly frail, 67 (22.3%) as moderately frail, and 72 (23.9%) as severely frail. Compared with fit patients, patients with severe frailty had higher one-year mortality (19/72 (26.4%) vs 6/99 (6.1%); adjusted OR, 12.08; 95% CI, 1.54-94.89) and more prolonged hospitalizations (>20 days) (22/70 (31.4%) vs 2/90 (2.2%); adjusted OR, 6.38; 95% CI, 1.39-29.23). Associations with readmission and refracture were not statistically significant. Conclusion Osteoporosis care after fragility fracture was markedly underused, while a cumulative deficit FI identified patients at substantially higher risk of adverse outcomes. Routine frailty screening after fracture could help target secondary prevention efforts.

Related

  1. Severe Early-Onset Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures in a Young Male With Chronic Recurrent Multifocal Osteomyelitis Within the SAPHO Spectrum
    Sani Yasnain, Sandhya Shanthosh Kumar, Dur E Shahwar +3
    AACE Endocrinology and DiabetesPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textEndocrinology & metabolismPMC
  2. Physical therapist management of patients with suspected or confirmed osteoporosis – German translation and contextual adaptation of a clinical practice guideline from the Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy (USA)
    Tobias Braun, Maxime Hermanns, Vanessa Haug +6
    Frontiers in Rehabilitation SciencesPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textEpidemiology & public healthPMCEurope PMC
  3. The osteoporosis–fracture paradox in older Taiwanese men: lower osteoporosis prevalence but comparable fragility fracture burden
    Yi-Yen Lee, Yi-Chieh Huang, Sheng-Wen Kao +2
    Archives of OsteoporosisPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textSurgery & anaesthesiaPMC
  4. Clinical Outcomes of the H-Shaped Incision in the Surgical Management of Naso-Orbito-Ethmoidal Fractures: A Prospective Clinical Study.
    Effie Edsor, Prabhusankar K, Srinisha M +3
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMCPMC
  5. Impact of direct oral anticoagulant treatment on management and outcomes of patients with hip fractures by monitoring assays. A population-based study of a cohort from the Geriatric Perioperative Unit
    Yann Gricourt, Mikael Perin, Nicolas Basseres +6
    Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full text1 citedGeneral biologyPharmacology & toxicologyHAL
BibTeX
@article{alsulaiman2026management,
  title = {{Management, Practice, and Outcomes of Fragility Fractures and Osteoporosis Care at a Tertiary Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.}},
  author = {Yazeed Alsulaiman and Abdulrahman Alsahli and Abdullah Alamoudi and Rayan Almutairi and Leen Almojel and Dana Alturaifi},
  journal = {Cureus},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.7759/cureus.116907},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42928876},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Management, Practice, and Outcomes of Fragility Fractures and Osteoporosis Care at a Tertiary Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
AU  - Yazeed Alsulaiman
AU  - Abdulrahman Alsahli
AU  - Abdullah Alamoudi
AU  - Rayan Almutairi
AU  - Leen Almojel
AU  - Dana Alturaifi
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/25
JO  - Cureus
DO  - 10.7759/cureus.116907
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42928876
AB  - Introduction and objectives Fragility fractures are sentinel events for osteoporosis, yet secondary prevention remains underused, and chronological age alone may not capture the physiological vulnerability that shapes post-fracture outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate osteoporosis-related care after fragility fracture and its association with frailty in adults hospitalized with fragility fractures in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, electronic health records (EHRs) were reviewed for 301 adults admitted with fragility fractures at a tertiary hospital in Riyadh in 2024 (mean (SD) age, 72.8 (11.2) years; 52.2% women). Frailty was quantified using a cumulative deficit index built from 24 clinical, functional, and laboratory variables and categorized into quartile-based groups. Primary outcomes were prolonged hospitalization (>20 days) and mortality; secondary outcomes were unplanned readmission and refracture within one year. Results Anti-osteoporosis therapy was initiated during hospitalization in 8/301 patients (2.7%) and prescribed at discharge to 12/301 patients (4.0%); only 29 patients (9.6%) underwent follow-up bone mineral density (BMD) testing within one year. Out of 301 patients, 99 (32.9%) were classified as fit (frailty index (FI) ≤0.174), 63 (20.9%) as mildly frail, 67 (22.3%) as moderately frail, and 72 (23.9%) as severely frail. Compared with fit patients, patients with severe frailty had higher one-year mortality (19/72 (26.4%) vs 6/99 (6.1%); adjusted OR, 12.08; 95% CI, 1.54-94.89) and more prolonged hospitalizations (>20 days) (22/70 (31.4%) vs 2/90 (2.2%); adjusted OR, 6.38; 95% CI, 1.39-29.23). Associations with readmission and refracture were not statistically significant. Conclusion Osteoporosis care after fragility fracture was markedly underused, while a cumulative deficit FI identified patients at substantially higher risk of adverse outcomes. Routine frailty screening after fracture could help target secondary prevention efforts.
SN  - 2168-8184
ER  -