INTRODUCTION: There is a need for cost-effective clinical methods to select women for bone densitometry. The aim of the present study was to determine whether relatively simple and clinically applicable physical tests could be useful in prediction of bone density in postmenopausal women. METHODS: A total of 606 women (age range 66-71 years) taking part in the population based OSTPRE Fracture Prevention Study were investigated. Spinal and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). Physical tests included the standing-on-one-foot (SOOF), grip strength (GS), leg extension strength, ability to squat down, standing 10 s eyes closed, chair rising, regular walk for 10 m and tandem walk for 6 m. All linear regression models were adjusted for age, body mass index, years on hormone therapy, years since menopause, current smoking and use of oral glucocorticoids. RESULTS: The SOOF was associated with lumbar spine BMD (r2=0.16, p=0.004) and the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.17 to 0.23 and p-values all<0.001). The GS was associated with lumbar spine BMD (r2=0.16, p=0.011) and the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.16 to 0.21 and p-values from <0.001 to 0.004). The ability to squat down on the floor was associated with the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.15 to 0.21 and p-values from 0.028 to 0.040). In addition, functional capacity was decreased in women with femoral neck osteoporosis (WHO classification) compared to women with normal or osteopenic BMD: SOOF -39% (p=0.001), GS -18% (p<0.001), leg extension strength -19% (p=0.007) and ability to squat down on the floor -40% (p=0.004). For osteoporosis prediction (ROC analysis) a threshold of a 22 kg in GS would yield a true-positive rate (sensitivity) of about 58% and a true-negative rate (specificity) of 86% (AUC 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that grip strength could be used in medical decision making to identify those women who would benefit from BMD measurements albeit alone it may not provide accurate enough tool for osteoporosis screening.
INTRODUCTION: There is a need for cost-effective clinical methods to select women for bone densitometry. The aim of the present study was to determine whether relatively simple and clinically applicable physical tests could be useful in prediction of bone density in postmenopausal women. METHODS: A total of 606 women (age range 66-71 years) taking part in the population based OSTPRE Fracture Prevention Study were investigated. Spinal and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). Physical tests included the standing-on-one-foot (SOOF), grip strength (GS), leg extension strength, ability to squat down, standing 10 s eyes closed, chair rising, regular walk for 10 m and tandem walk for 6 m. All linear regression models were adjusted for age, body mass index, years on hormone therapy, years since menopause, current smoking and use of oral glucocorticoids. RESULTS: The SOOF was associated with lumbar spine BMD (r2=0.16, p=0.004) and the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.17 to 0.23 and p-values all<0.001). The GS was associated with lumbar spine BMD (r2=0.16, p=0.011) and the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.16 to 0.21 and p-values from <0.001 to 0.004). The ability to squat down on the floor was associated with the femoral regions (r2 values from 0.15 to 0.21 and p-values from 0.028 to 0.040). In addition, functional capacity was decreased in women with femoral neck osteoporosis (WHO classification) compared to women with normal or osteopenic BMD: SOOF -39% (p=0.001), GS -18% (p<0.001), leg extension strength -19% (p=0.007) and ability to squat down on the floor -40% (p=0.004). For osteoporosis prediction (ROC analysis) a threshold of a 22 kg in GS would yield a true-positive rate (sensitivity) of about 58% and a true-negative rate (specificity) of 86% (AUC 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that grip strength could be used in medical decision making to identify those women who would benefit from BMD measurements albeit alone it may not provide accurate enough tool for osteoporosis screening.
Authors: Yejee Lim; Kyunghee Kim; Sun-Hee Ko; Kwanhoon Cho; Eun-Hee Jang; Seung-Hwan Lee; Dong Jun Lim; Ki Hyun Baek; Hee-Sung Ha; Mi Sun Park; Hyeon-Woo Yim; Won-Chul Lee; Kun-Ho Yoon; Ho Young Son; Ki Won Oh; Moo-Il Kang Journal: J Bone Miner Metab Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 2.626
Authors: M C van der Goes; J W G Jacobs; M S Jurgens; M F Bakker; M J van der Veen; J H van der Werf; P M J Welsing; J W J Bijlsma Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: S C Ibeneme; C Ekanem; A Ezuma; N Iloanusi; N N Lasebikan; O A Lasebikan; O E Oboh Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 2.362