Trends in osteoporosis diagnosis and management in Australia.

Unlabelled: Trends in bone mineral density monitoring, and drug treatment for osteoporosis, in Australia were examined. Rates of DEXA scanning have increased in response to changes to government policy affecting reimbursement. The drug denosumab is being utilised at an increasing rate, while bisphosphonate use has declined. Osteoporosis prevalence remained stable over the same timeframe, while rate of hip fractures declined, suggesting that introduction of osteoporosis screening was associated with a reduction in adverse osteoporosis outcomes, but may also have been associated with overutilisation.

Introduction: Radiology interventions to diagnose and medications to manage osteoporosis in Australia are reimbursed under the Medicare benefits schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Monitoring of these databases enables changes in utilisation of these practices to be monitored over time.

Methods: This study examined rates of utilisation for bone mineral density (BMD) measurement and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy subsidised under the MBS. Rates of osteoporosis and hip fracture were estimated using data reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and Australian Institute for Health and Welfare (AIHW).

Results: Rates of BMD measurement increased since the technology was first reimbursed, with changes to policy regarding reimbursement for screening for individuals over 70 leading to an increase in BMD measurement after 2007. Prescribing rates also increased over time, initially with the introduction of oral bisphosphonates and subsequently for denosumab, which has subsequently become the most commonly prescribed agent for osteoporosis management in Australia, while bisphosphonate use has declined. Osteoporosis prevalence in Australia has remained relatively static at 3-4% of the population since 2001 to 2017, while rates of minimal trauma hip fracture hospitalisations have declined from 195 per 100,000 to 174 per 100,000 in the same timeframe.

Conclusion: Available data indicates that osteoporosis screening rates changed over time from 2001 to 2018 and that changes to government policy had a significant effect on the rates at which screening was performed. Over the same timeframe, there was a sustained reduction in hip fracture hospitalisation rates, with no change to reported osteoporosis prevalence. This suggests that policy changes permitting unlimited access to BMD measurement were associated with a reduction in osteoporotic fractures, but may also have been associated with overutilisation. Prospective studies to assess the efficacy of specific policies to ensure screening is performed in accordance with best-practice guidelines may be desirable.