Assessing the awareness of doctors of various specialties in the treatment of osteoporosis

Objective: to assess the degree of doctors’ awareness on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of patients with osteoporosis.

Material and methods. The study was conducted using the Yandex Forms service through an original anonymous questionnaire comprising 16 questions concerning personal characteristics (specialty, work experience, category, and academic degree), as well as the degree of awareness in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis. The questions about the treatment of the disease were compiled based on Russian and foreign clinical guidelines.

Results. Knowledge of the causes and symptoms of osteoporosis was relatively high, but further findings from the survey on prevention, diagnosis and treatment revealed a lack of awareness among physicians in this area. Only 13.7% of respondents identified the potential use of the promising FRAX tool in osteoporosis diagnosing, and only 25% correctly selected first-line medications for treating the disease.

Conclusion. The study revealed that doctors lack sufficient knowledge regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and drug therapy for osteoporosis. In our view, this finding underscores the need for a more comprehensive approach to this issue within the context of continuing medical education. The therapy effectiveness and patients’ complience directly depend on the communication between physicians and pharmacists. Therefore, it becomes essential to consider enhancing their collaboration in osteoporosis prevention and management.

1. Audit of the state of the problem of osteoporosis in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. 2020 Available at: https://osteoporosis-russia.ru/wpcontent/uploads/2022/02/audit_osteoporosis_raop.pdf (in Russ.) (accessed 12.09.2023).

2. Narkevich A.N., Vinogradov K. A. Methods for determining the minimum required sample size in medical research. Social'nye aspekty zdorov'a naselenia /social Aspects of Population Health. 2019; 65 (6): 10 (in Russ.).

3. Lesnyak O.M. The new paradigm in diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis: prediction of a 10-year absolute risk of fracture (Calculator FRAX). Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2012; 15 (1): 23–8 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo2012123-28.

4. Johansson H., Azizieh F., al Ali N., et al. FRAX- vs. T-score-based intervention thresholds for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2017; 28 (11): 3099–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4160-7.

5. Malichenko S.B., Mashchenko E.A., Ogaj D.S. The use of innovative FRAX technique for fracture risk evaluation in elderly patients not previously examined and treated with anti-osteoporotic therapy. Benefits and possible risks. Medical and Social Expert Evaluation and Rehabilitation. 2012; 15 (2): 33–6 (in Russ.).

6. Zaigrova N.K., Uryas'ev O.M., Shahanov A.V., Tverdova L.V. Possibility of FRAX tool in the diagnostics of osteoporosis. I.P. Pavlov Russian Medical Biological Herald. 2017; 25 (1): 62–8 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23888/PAVLOVJ2017162-68.

7. Alekseeva V.A., Ovsyankin A.V., Kuzminova E.S., et al. Osteoporosis: assessment of diagnostic techniques for drug therapy administration. Vestnik of the Smolensk State Medical Academy. 2023; 22 (2): 67–73. https://doi.org/10.37903/vsgma.2023.2.9.

8. Belaya Z.E., Belova K.Y., Biryukova E.V., et al. Federal clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2021; 24 (2): 4–47 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo12930.

9. Alekseeva V.A., Krikova A.V. Market analysis of drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis and prospects for its development in the Russian Federation. Remedium. 2023; 27 (2): 123–7 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.32687/1561-5936-2023-27-2-123-127.

10. Marchenkova L.A., Dreval A.V., Kryukovа I.V. Awareness of physi- cians of various specialties of osteoporosis in the Moscow region. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2012; 15 (1): 11–4 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo2012111-14.

11. Kuznetsova O.Yu., Moiseeva I.E. Assessment of awareness of family physicians about the problem of osteoporosis.russian Family Doctor. 2013; 17 (2): 18–20 (in Russ.).

12. Marchenkova L.A., Kryukovа I.V. The level of awareness of the problem of osteoporosis among doctors working in medical rehabilitation departments and the effectiveness of additional professional education. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2022; 25 (3): 80 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo13049.

13. Nikitinskaya O.A., Toroptsova N.V. Current state of diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in real-life clinical practice (a pilot study). Sovremennaya revmatologiya / Modern Rheumatology Journal. 2014; 8 (2): 58–62 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14412/1996-7012-2014-258-62.

14. Mustafina M.O., Uteuliev E.S., Kupensheyeva D.I. The effectiveness of active learning methods in medical interns in “General practioner”. Vestnik KazNMU. 2016; 2: 416–9 (in Russ.).

15. Smith C. A systematic review of healthcare professional-led education for patients with osteoporosis or those at high risk for the disease. Orthop Nurs. 2010; 29 (2): 119–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/NOR.0b013e3181d24414.

16. Lai P.S., Chua S.S., Chan S.P. Pharmaceutical care issues encountered by post-menopausal osteoporotic women prescribed bisphosphonates. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2012; 37 (5): 536–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2710.2012.01335.x.

17. Hajjar R., Bassatne A., Cheaito M.A., et al. Characterizing the interaction between physicians, pharmacists and pharmaceutical representatives in a middle-income country: a qualitative study. PLoS One. 2017; 12 (9): e0184662. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184662.