[Osteoporosis - whom to treat? The importance of FRAX® in Switzerland]

The WHO fracture risk assessment tool FRAX® is a computer based algorithm that provides models for the assessment of fracture probability in men and women. The approach uses easily obtained clinical risk factors (CRFs) to estimate 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture (hip, clinical spine, humerus or wrist fracture) and the 10-year probability of a hip fracture. The estimate can be used alone or with femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) to enhance fracture risk prediction. FRAX® is the only risk engine which takes into account the hazard of death as well as that of fracture. Probability of fracture is calculated in men and women from age, body mass index, and dichotomized variables that comprise a prior fragility fracture, parental history of hip fracture, current tobacco smoking, ever long-term use of oral glucocorticoids, rheumatoid arthritis, other causes of secondary osteoporosis, daily alcohol consumption of 3 or more units daily. The relationship between risk factors and fracture probability was constructed using information of nine population-based cohorts from around the world. CRFs for fracture had been identified that provided independent information on fracture risk based on a series of meta-analyses. The FRAX® algorithm was validated in 11 independent cohorts with in excess of 1 million patient-years, including the Swiss SEMOF cohort. Since fracture risk varies markedly in different regions of the world, FRAX® models need to be calibrated to those countries where the epidemiology of fracture and death is known. Models are currently available for 31 countries across the world. The Swiss-specific FRAX® model was developed very soon after the first release of FRAX® in 2008 and was published in 2009, using Swiss epidemiological data, integrating fracture risk and death hazard of our country. Two FRAX®-based approaches may be used to explore intervention thresholds. They have recently been investigated in the Swiss setting. In the first approach the guideline that individuals with a fracture probability equal to or exceeding that of women with a prior fragility fracture should be considered for treatment is translated into thresholds using 10-year fracture probabilities. In that case the threshold is age-dependent and increases from 16 % at the age of 60 ys to 40 % at the age of 80 ys. The second approach is a cost-effectiveness approach. Using a FRAX®-based intervention threshold of 15 % for both, women and men 50 years and older, should permit cost-effective access to therapy to patients at high fracture probability in our country and thereby contribute to further reduce the growing burden of osteoporotic fractures.

[Epidemiology and burden of osteoporosis in Switzerland]

With increasing life expectancy and a growing proportion of elderly in the Swiss population, the burden of osteoporosis increases continuously. Every other woman and every fifth man aged 50 years or older will suffer an osteoportic fracture during her or his remaining lifetime. While the absolute number of hospitalizations for hip fractures has stabilized between year 2000 and 2007, the total number of hospitalizations for osteoporotic fractures has increased to 16'200 (+ 16 %) and 5'600 (+ 20 %) in women and men, respectively. Thus, osteoporosis continues belonging to those chronic diseases imposing the highest economic burden to the Swiss healthcare system, trend increasing. In addition, the risk of subsequent fractures as well as the adjusted mortality risk increases significantly after a first osteoporotic fracture. Should appropriate measures not be implemented in the near future, so will osteoporosis become one of the key challenges for the Swiss healthcare system within the coming years.

Perinatal care at the limit of viability between 22 and 26 completed weeks of gestation in Switzerland. 2011 revision of the Swiss recommendations

Perinatal care of pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery and of preterm infants born at the limit of viability (22-26 completed weeks of gestation) requires a multidisciplinary approach by an experienced perinatal team. Limited precision in the determination of both gestational age and foetal weight, as well as biological variability may significantly affect the course of action chosen in individual cases. The decisions that must be taken with the pregnant women and on behalf of the preterm infant in this context are complex and have far-reaching consequences. When counselling pregnant women and their partners, neonatologists and obstetricians should provide them with comprehensive information in a sensitive and supportive way to build a basis of trust. The decisions are developed in a continuing dialogue between all parties involved (physicians, midwives, nursing staff and parents) with the principal aim to find solutions that are in the infant's and pregnant woman's best interest. Knowledge of current gestational age-specific mortality and morbidity rates and how they are modified by prenatally known prognostic factors (estimated foetal weight, sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, single or multiple births) as well as the application of accepted ethical principles form the basis for responsible decision-making. Communication between all parties involved plays a central role. The members of the interdisciplinary working group suggest that the care of preterm infants with a gestational age between 22 0/7 and 23 6/7 weeks should generally be limited to palliative care. Obstetric interventions for foetal indications such as Caesarean section delivery are usually not indicated. In selected cases, for example, after 23 weeks of pregnancy have been completed and several of the above mentioned prenatally known prognostic factors are favourable or well informed parents insist on the initiation of life-sustaining therapies, active obstetric interventions for foetal indications and provisional intensive care of the neonate may be reasonable. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 24 0/7 and 24 6/7 weeks, it can be difficult to determine whether the burden of obstetric interventions and neonatal intensive care is justified given the limited chances of success of such a therapy. In such cases, the individual constellation of prenatally known factors which impact on prognosis can be helpful in the decision making process with the parents. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 25 0/7 and 25 6/7 weeks, foetal surveillance, obstetric interventions for foetal indications and neonatal intensive care measures are generally indicated. However, if several prenatally known prognostic factors are unfavourable and the parents agree, primary non-intervention and neonatal palliative care can be considered. All pregnant women with threatening preterm delivery or premature rupture of membranes at the limit of viability must be transferred to a perinatal centre with a level III neonatal intensive care unit no later than 23 0/7 weeks of gestation, unless emergency delivery is indicated. An experienced neonatology team should be involved in all deliveries that take place after 23 0/7 weeks of gestation to help to decide together with the parents if the initiation of intensive care measures appears to be appropriate or if preference should be given to palliative care (i.e., primary non-intervention). In doubtful situations, it can be reasonable to initiate intensive care and to admit the preterm infant to a neonatal intensive care unit (i.e., provisional intensive care). The infant's clinical evolution and additional discussions with the parents will help to clarify whether the life-sustaining therapies should be continued or withdrawn. Life support is continued as long as there is reasonable hope for survival and the infant's burden of intensive care is acceptable. If, on the other hand, the health car...

Medical treatment of hypertension in Switzerland. The 2009 Swiss Hypertension Survey (SWISSHYPE)

Despite a broad and efficient pharmacological antihypertensive armamentarium, blood pressure (BP) control is suboptimal and heterogeneous throughout Europe. Recent representative data from Switzerland are limited. The goal of the present survey was therefore to assess the actual control rate of high BP in Switzerland in accordance with current guidelines. The influence of risk factors, target organ damage and medication on BP levels and control was also evaluated.