Search

Objectives: To investigate the knowledge and practices of Chinese doctors in the management of osteoporotic fractures after the Chinese osteoporotic fracture guidelines update and aseries of medical education in 2017. Methods: This was a cross‐sectional survey of doctors in 71 cities across Mainland China. Based on the 2017 Chinese guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporotic fractures, a questionnaire was designed and pre‐tested for reliability and validity. Doctors were surveyed with the questionnaire after scientific meetings during February 2017 to January 2018 through WeChat or conference digital platforms or in paper form. Descriptive statistics was used to analyze the responses to the questionnaire. Results: Overall, 314 valid questionnaires were confirmed. Regarding diagnosis, 77% agreed that osteoporosis could be diagnosed once an osteoporotic fracture occurred; 83% believed that the bone mineral density criteria for osteoporosis diagnosis would be T ≤ −2.5 SD. For treatment, almost all (99.7%) agreed with anti‐osteoporosis treatment being one of the basic principles of osteoporotic fracture treatment; 71.6% considered bisphosphonates as the most commonly used anti‐osteoporosis drug; 97% believed that patients who have used anti‐osteoporosis drugs should reassess osteoporosis after osteoporotic fractures instead of discontinue; 95% thought that the patients who did not use anti‐osteoporosis medications before osteoporotic fracture should be treated with anti‐osteoporosis drugs after fracture treatment as early as possible; 89% agreed that the standard use of bisphosphonates after osteoporotic fracture would not affect bone healing adversely; 59% believed the course of bisphosphonates treatment for osteoporosis would be 3–5 years, and 27% considered it to be 1–3 years. The patient follow‐up rate was poor: 46% selected follow‐up rate <30%; only 20% selected follow‐up rate >50%. Only 31% of the hospitals had long‐term management programs for osteoporotic fractures. Conclusions: Doctors generally adhered to the updated Chinese guidelines for osteoporotic fractures; frequent participation in medical education can help doctors to increase their awareness of osteoporosis as well as their acceptance and practice of the guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioethics is a practically oriented discipline that developed to address pressing ethical issues arising from developments in the life sciences. Given this inherent practical bent, some form of advocacy or activism seems inherent to the nature of bioethics. However, there are potential tensions between being a bioethics activist, and academic ideals. In academic bioethics, scholarship involves reflection, rigour and the embrace of complexity and uncertainty. These values of scholarship seem to be in tension with being an activist, which requires pragmatism, simplicity, certainty and, above all, action. In this paper I explore this apparent dichotomy, using the case example of my own involvement in international efforts to end forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience in China. I conclude that these tensions can be managed and that academic bioethics requires a willingness to be activist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]