Patient Healthcare Trajectory and its Impact on the Cost‐Effectiveness of Fracture Liaison Services

This study aimed to assess the cost-utility of a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) with a systematic follow-up according to patients' follow-up compliance trajectories. The Lucky Bone™ FLS is a prospective cohort study conducted on women and men (≥40 years) with fragility fractures. Dedicated personnel of the program identified fractures, investigated, treated, and followed patients systematically over 2 years. Groups of follow-up compliance trajectories were identified, and Markov decision models were used to assess the cost-utility of each follow-up trajectory group compared to usual care. A lifetime horizon from the perspective of the healthcare payer was modeled. Costs were converted to 2018 Canadian dollars and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were measured. Costs and benefits were discounted at 1.5%. A total of 532 participants were followed in the FLS (86% women, mean age of 63 years). Three trajectories were predicted and interpreted; the high followers (HFs, 48.4%), intermediate followers (IFs, 28.1%), and low followers (LFs, 23.5%). The costs of the interventions per patient varied between $300 and $446 for 2 years, according to the follow-up trajectory. The FLS had higher investigation, treatment, and persistence rates compared to usual care. Compared to usual care, the ICURs for the HF, IF, and LF trajectory groups were $4250, $21,900, and $72,800 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, respectively ($9000 per QALY gained for the overall FLS). Sensitivity analyses showed that the HF and IF trajectory groups, as well as the entire FLS, were cost-effective in >67% of simulations with respect to usual care. In summary, these results suggest that a high-intensity FLS with a systematic 2-year follow-up can be cost-effective, especially when patients attend follow-up visits. They also highlight the importance of understanding the behaviors and factors that surround follow-up compliance over time as secondary prevention means that they are at high risk of re-fracture. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).