Literature DB >> 10824239

Screening for osteoporosis using easily obtainable biometrical data: diagnostic accuracy of measured, self-reported and recalled BMI, and related costs of bone mineral density measurements.

D J van der Voort1, S Brandon, G J Dinant, J W van Wersch.   

Abstract

The aims of the present study were: to determine the diagnostic accuracy of objectively measured, self-reported and recalled body mass index (BMI) for osteoporosis and osteopenia; to determine the diagnostic costs, in terms of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements, per osteoporotic or osteopenic patient detected, using different BMI tests; and to determine the extent to which the results can be used within the framework of the current screening program for breast cancer in The Netherlands. Within the framework of a cross-sectional study on the prevalence of osteoporosis in the south of The Netherlands, 1155 postmenopausal women aged 50-80 years were asked for their present height and their weight at age 20-30 years. Subsequently their actual weight, height and BMD of the lumbar spine (DXA) were measured. The BMD cutoff was 0.800 g/cm2 for osteoporosis and 0.970 g/cm2 for low BMD (osteoporosis + osteopenia). After receiver operating characteristic analysis, age was cut off at 60 years and BMI at 27 kg/m2. Diagnostic accuracies of objectively measured, self-reported and recalled BMI were evaluated using predictive values (PV) and odds ratios. The resulting 'true positive' and 'false positive' rates were used to calculate diagnostic costs (i.e., DXA) for each osteoporotic patient or low-BMD patient detected. The prevalence of osteoporosis in the study population was 25%, that of low BMD 65%. Only the age-BMI tests 'age > or = 60, BMI < or = 27' showed PVs for osteoporosis (31-41%) and for low BMD (71-81%) that were higher than the prior probabilities for these conditions. Related odds ratios were 2.14-3.18 (osteoporosis) and 1.87-3.04 (low BMD). The objective BMI test detected 50% of the osteoporotic patients. Using the self-reported BMI test and the recalled BMI test, detection rates increased to 55% and 69%, respectively. Concomitant costs per osteoporotic patient detected rose by 24%. Detection of patients with a low BMD increased from 38% for objective BMI and 42% for self-reported BMI to 60% for recalled BMI. Related costs increased by 11%. If all women over 50 years of age (irrespective of their BMI) were to be referred for BMD measurement, costs per osteoporotic patient or low-BMD patient detected would be 304 and 116 Euros, respectively. Only in women over 60 years does a BMI below 27 kg/m2 provide a better prediction of the presence of osteoporosis or low BMD than could be expected solely on the basis of the relevant prevalences in postmenopausal women aged 50-80 years. If the use of BMI for the detection of osteoporotic or low-BMD patients is still considered, measuring weight and just asking for a person's height will do. Although age and BMI are the strongest risk factors for osteoporosis, they are of less significance when used for screening the population for osteoporosis. More research is needed before age and BMI can be included in any screening program. As regards practical considerations alone, measurements of BMD could be implemented within the screening program for breast cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10824239     DOI: 10.1007/s001980050286

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  8 in total

Review 1.  Superiority of age and weight as variables in predicting osteoporosis in postmenopausal white women.

Authors:  Manfred Wildner; Andrea Peters; Vibhavendra S Raghuvanshi; Jörg Hohnloser; Uwe Siebert
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-09-16       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Which screening strategy using BMD measurements would be most cost effective for hip fracture prevention in elderly women? A decision analysis based on a Markov model.

Authors:  A M Schott; C Ganne; D Hans; G Monnier; R Gauchoux; M A Krieg; P D Delmas; P J Meunier; C Colin
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-10-13       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Association between gestational weight gain according to body mass index and postpartum weight in a large cohort of Danish women.

Authors:  Line Rode; Hanne Kjærgaard; Bent Ottesen; Peter Damm; Hanne K Hegaard
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2012-02

4.  Early menopause: increased fracture risk at older age.

Authors:  D J M van Der Voort; P H M van Der Weijer; R Barentsen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-04-30       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Association between Body Mass Index and Bone Mineral Density in Patients Referred for Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Scan in Ajman, UAE.

Authors:  Tarek Fawzy; Jayakumary Muttappallymyalil; Jayadevan Sreedharan; Amal Ahmed; Salma Obaid Saeed Alshamsi; Mariyam Saif Salim Humaid Bin Bader Al Ali; Khawla Ahmed Al Balsooshi
Journal:  J Osteoporos       Date:  2011-05-22

6.  Prevalence and risk factors for osteoporotic fracture among adults with comorbidities in Al-Ahsaa, Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Naif M Al Hamam; Ghusoon F Al-Moaibed; Emad H Alfayez; Eman H Alfayez; Mohammed Saud Al-Mubaddil; Narjes Ali Alramadhan
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2020-02-28

7.  Discordant effect of body mass index on bone mineral density and speed of sound.

Authors:  Miriam Steinschneider; Philippe Hagag; Micha J Rapoport; Mordechai Weiss
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2003-07-16       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Relationship between Weight, Body Mass Index, and Bone Mineral Density in Men Referred for Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Scan in Isfahan, Iran.

Authors:  Mohammad Reza Salamat; Amir Hossein Salamat; Iraj Abedi; Mohsen Janghorbani
Journal:  J Osteoporos       Date:  2013-10-03
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.