Literature DB >> 20480142

Hip fracture risk in older US adults by treatment eligibility status based on new National Osteoporosis Foundation guidance.

A C Looker1, B Dawson-Hughes, A N A Tosteson, H Johansson, J A Kanis, L J Melton.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This analysis of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III data found a significant risk of incident hip fracture in adults aged 65 years and older who are candidates for treatment to lower fracture risk, according to the new National Osteoporosis Foundation Clinician's Guide.
INTRODUCTION: The relationship between treatment eligibility by the new National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) Guide to the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis and the risk of subsequent hip fracture is unknown.
METHODS: The study sample consisted of 3,208 men and women ages 65 years and older who were examined in the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III, 1988-1994), a nationally representative survey. Risk factors used to define treatment eligibility at baseline were measured in NHANES III or were simulated using World Health Organization study cohorts. Incident hip fractures were ascertained using linked mortality and Medicare records that were obtained for NHANES III participants through December 31, 2000. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the relative risk (RR) of hip fracture by treatment eligibility status.
RESULTS: The RR for subsequent hip fracture was 4.9 (95% CI 3.30, 7.94) in treatment-eligible vs treatment-ineligible persons. The increased risk for treatment-eligible persons remained statistically significant when examined by sex or age: RR(men) = 5.5 (2.6, 11.4) and RR(women) = 4.3 (2.2, 8.4); RR(65-79 y) = 4.8 (2.6, 8.7) and RR(80+ y) = 4.6 (2.1, 10.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment-eligible persons were about five times more likely to experience a subsequent hip fracture than the non-eligible persons. The new NOF guidelines appear to predict future hip fracture risk equally in men as in women, and fracture risk prediction did not appear to diminish with age.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20480142     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-010-1288-0

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


  31 in total

Review 1.  FRAX and its applications to clinical practice.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Anders Oden; Helena Johansson; Fredrik Borgström; Oskar Ström; Eugene McCloskey
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025.

Authors:  Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  An assessment tool for predicting fracture risk in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  D M Black; M Steinbuch; L Palermo; P Dargent-Molina; R Lindsay; M S Hoseyni; O Johnell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Identification of fractures from computerized Medicare files.

Authors:  W A Ray; M R Griffin; R L Fought; M L Adams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  The exclusion of high trauma fractures may underestimate the prevalence of bone fragility fractures in the community: the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  K M Sanders; J A Pasco; A M Ugoni; G C Nicholson; E Seeman; T J Martin; B Skoric; S Panahi; M A Kotowicz
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Simplified system for absolute fracture risk assessment: clinical validation in Canadian women.

Authors:  William D Leslie; James F Tsang; Lisa M Lix
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  FRAX and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK.

Authors:  J A Kanis; O Johnell; A Oden; H Johansson; E McCloskey
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Repeat low-trauma fractures occur frequently among men and women who have osteopenic BMD.

Authors:  Lisa Langsetmo; David Goltzman; Christopher S Kovacs; Jonathan D Adachi; David A Hanley; Nancy Kreiger; Robert Josse; Alexandra Papaioannou; Wojciech P Olszynski; Sophie A Jamal
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of treatments to prevent fractures in men and women with low bone density or osteoporosis.

Authors:  Catherine MacLean; Sydne Newberry; Margaret Maglione; Maureen McMahon; Veena Ranganath; Marika Suttorp; Walter Mojica; Martha Timmer; Alicia Alexander; Melissa McNamara; Sheetal B Desai; Annie Zhou; Susan Chen; Jason Carter; Carlo Tringale; Di Valentine; Breanne Johnsen; Jennifer Grossman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-12-17       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Updated fracture incidence rates for the US version of FRAX.

Authors:  B Ettinger; D M Black; B Dawson-Hughes; A R Pressman; L J Melton
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Type 2 diabetes and bone fractures.

Authors:  Kendall F Moseley
Journal:  Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.243

2.  Defining hip fracture with claims data: outpatient and provider claims matter.

Authors:  S D Berry; A R Zullo; K McConeghy; Y Lee; L Daiello; D P Kiel
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Health disparities in endocrine disorders: biological, clinical, and nonclinical factors--an Endocrine Society scientific statement.

Authors:  Sherita Hill Golden; Arleen Brown; Jane A Cauley; Marshall H Chin; Tiffany L Gary-Webb; Catherine Kim; Julie Ann Sosa; Anne E Sumner; Blair Anton
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 5.958

4.  Incidence of Hip Fracture in U.S. Nursing Homes.

Authors:  Sarah D Berry; Yoojin Lee; Andrew R Zullo; Doug P Kiel; David Dosa; Vincent Mor
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 6.053

5.  Lean mass predicts hip geometry in men and women with non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Kendall F Moseley; Devon A Dobrosielski; Kerry J Stewart; Deborah E Sellmeyer; Suzanne M Jan De Beur
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2011-06-11       Impact factor: 2.617

6.  Changes in bone mineral density over time by body mass index in the health ABC study.

Authors:  J T Lloyd; D E Alley; M C Hochberg; S R Waldstein; T B Harris; S B Kritchevsky; A V Schwartz; E S Strotmeyer; C Womack; D L Orwig
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Sex-specific differences in progressive glucose intolerance and hip geometry: the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging.

Authors:  K F Moseley; C W Chia; E M Simonsick; J M Egan; L Ferrucci; D E Sellmeyer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 8.  A brief history of FRAX.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Helena Johansson; Nicholas C Harvey; Eugene V McCloskey
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.617

9.  Are Nursing Home Residents With Dementia Appropriately Treated for Fracture Prevention?

Authors:  Joshua D Niznik; Xintong Li; Meredith A Gilliam; Laura C Hanson; Sherrie L Aspinall; Cathleen Colon-Emeric; Carolyn T Thorpe
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2020-12-13       Impact factor: 7.802

Review 10.  Systematic Review: Are the Elderly With Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 Prone to Fragility Fractures?

Authors:  Ioannis Papaioannou; Georgia Pantazidou; Zinon Kokkalis; Neoklis Georgopoulos; Eleni Jelastopulu
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-04-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.