Literature DB >> 16170443

Clinical risk indices, prediction of osteoporosis, and prevention of fractures: diagnostic consequences and costs.

Chatlert Pongchaiyakul1, Nguyen D Nguyen, John A Eisman, Tuan V Nguyen.   

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to validate the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tools for Asians (OSTA) instrument in Thai women, and to evaluate its utility in terms of economic costs and fracture prediction. Femoral neck and lumbar spine BMD was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in 322 Thai women, aged 60+/-10 years (mean+/-SD; range: 45-84 years). The women were classified as having osteoporosis if their BMD T-scores were < or =-2.5. The OSTA score was calculated for each woman using her age and weight according to the formula: 0.2(weight-age). Women with OSTA scores < or =-1 and >-1 were classified as "high risk" and "low risk," respectively. The prevalence of osteoporosis was 33% by femoral neck or lumbar spine BMD. Using the OSTA score, 165 (51.2%) women were classified as high risk. The sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of OSTA was 82% 64% and 53%, respectively. If the OSTA score is used to identify women with high risk of fracture, and assuming that the incidence of fracture among osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic women are 2% and 1% per year, respectively, the OSTA score can identify 59% of fracture cases correctly, and 41% are expected to be missed. Furthermore, if the high-risk subjects identified by OSTA are to be treated, and if the treatment reduces fracture incidence by 50%, and assuming that the treatment cost is $1 per day, then the cost to prevent one fracture is estimated to be $48,530. Results of this study suggest that, in the Thai population, the OSTA score had high sensitivity but low specificity and low positive predictive value in the identification of osteoporotic women. Its use in the general population can result in a high false-positive rate and incur significant cost to the community.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16170443     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-005-1996-z

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


  16 in total

1.  Total body and regional bone mineral density in men: effect of age.

Authors:  D Fatayerji; A M Cooper; R Eastell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 2.  Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  Steven R Cummings; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-05-18       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Low body mass index is an important risk factor for low bone mass and increased bone loss in early postmenopausal women. Early Postmenopausal Intervention Cohort (EPIC) study group.

Authors:  P Ravn; G Cizza; N H Bjarnason; D Thompson; M Daley; R D Wasnich; M McClung; D Hosking; A J Yates; C Christiansen
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 6.741

4.  A simple tool to identify asian women at increased risk of osteoporosis.

Authors:  L K Koh; W B Sedrine; T P Torralba; A Kung; S Fujiwara; S P Chan; Q R Huang; R Rajatanavin; K S Tsai; H M Park; J Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Limited utility of clinical indices for the prediction of symptomatic fracture risk in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Tuan V Nguyen; Jacqueline R Center; Nicholas A Pocock; John A Eisman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-10-30       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Relation between body size and bone mineral density in elderly men and women.

Authors:  S L Edelstein; E Barrett-Connor
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1993-08-01       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Comparison of a simple clinical risk index and quantitative bone ultrasound for identifying women at increased risk of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Annie W C Kung; Andrew Y Y Ho; Wafa Ben Sedrine; Jean-Yves Reginster; Philip D Ross
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-07-30       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 8.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  John A Kanis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Sources of variability in bone mineral density measurements: implications for study design and analysis of bone loss.

Authors:  T V Nguyen; P N Sambrook; J A Eisman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  The association between age and bone mineral density in men and women aged 55 years and over: the Rotterdam Study.

Authors:  H Burger; P L van Daele; D Algra; F A van den Ouweland; D E Grobbee; A Hofman; C van Kuijk; H E Schütte; J C Birkenhäger; H A Pols
Journal:  Bone Miner       Date:  1994-04
View more
  5 in total

1.  A nomogram for predicting osteoporosis risk based on age, weight and quantitative ultrasound measurement.

Authors:  C Pongchaiyakul; S Panichkul; T Songpatanasilp; T V Nguyen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 2.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for osteoporosis or low bone density.

Authors:  S Nayak; D L Edwards; A A Saleh; S L Greenspan
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Computer-assisted evaluation of Mandibular Cortical Width (MCW) index as an indicator of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Mk Papamanthos; Se Varitimidis; Zh Dailiana; Ei Kogia; Kn Malizos
Journal:  Hippokratia       Date:  2014 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 0.471

4.  The relationship of an Asian-specific screening tool for osteoporosis to vertebral deformity and osteoporosis.

Authors:  Sunee Saetung; Boonsong Ongphiphadhanakul; Rajata Rajatanavin
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Bone health comparison in seven Asian countries using calcaneal ultrasound.

Authors:  Marlena C Kruger; Joanne M Todd; Linda M Schollum; Barbara Kuhn-Sherlock; Drew W McLean; Kim Wylie
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 2.362

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.