Literature DB >> 21792523

Expected frequency of biomechanically adverse values of proximal femur geometric variables for fracture risk in the East Slovak female population (epidemiological study).

Jaroslava Wendlová1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The geometric configuration of the proximal femur predicts the risk for fracture by fall independently of bone mineral density (BMD). The objective of the study was to determine the expected frequency of biomechanically adverse and extremely adverse values of proximal femur geometric variables alpha angle, theta angle, and HAL, increasing the risk of a femoral neck fracture by fall, in the East Slovak female population.
METHODS: DXA (dual energy X-ray absorbtiometry) measurements of the left proximal femur were obtained and analysed from sample 3151 East Slovak women aged 20-89 years, [Formula: see text] = 58.9 years, SD = 11.1, with risk factors for the development of osteoporosis, with osteopenia and osteoporosis using bone densitometer (Prodigy - Primo, GE, USA). Measured variables: 1. geometric variables: alpha angle, theta angle, HAL (hip axis length) and 2. biomechanical variable: FNS (femoral neck strength). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: 1. Goodness-of-Fit Test χ(2)-test (Chi-Squared Test). 2. Logistic regression.
RESULTS: Biomechanically adverse value of angle α>6.869° can be expected in 10% of the East Slovak female population; extremely adverse value of angle α>12.3° in 1%; biomechanically adverse value of angle θ>129.405° in 20%; extremely adverse value of angle θ>132.290° in 10%; biomechanically adverse length of HAL>109.930 mm in 20%; extremely adverse length of HAL>113.015 mm in 10%.
CONCLUSIONS: The study brings the first data determining the mean values and 95% C.I. for proximal femur geometric variable values in the East female Slovak population. Biomechanically adverse values of proximal femur geometric variables are values higher than the upper limit of 95% C. I. and these findings enable now physicians to identify the individuals at risk and at high risk of hip fracture by fall.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21792523     DOI: 10.1007/s10354-011-0912-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr        ISSN: 0043-5341


  24 in total

1.  Why is it so important to balance the muscular dysbalance in mm. coxae area in osteoporotic patients?

Authors:  J Wendlova
Journal:  Bratisl Lek Listy       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.278

2.  Femoral neck geometry and hip fracture risk: the Geelong osteoporosis study.

Authors:  S El-Kaissi; J A Pasco; M J Henry; S Panahi; J G Nicholson; G C Nicholson; M A Kotowicz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Expected frequency of femoral neck fractures by fall in the osteoporotic and osteopenic East Slovak female population: Epidemiological study.

Authors:  Jaroslava Wendlova
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2010-08

4.  Geometric structure of the femoral neck measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  T Yoshikawa; C H Turner; M Peacock; C W Slemenda; C M Weaver; D Teegarden; P Markwardt; D B Burr
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Dual hip bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: geometry and effect of physical activity.

Authors:  R A Brownbill; C Lindsey; Z Crncevic-Orlic; J Z Ilich
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  A method for assessment of the shape of the proximal femur and its relationship to osteoporotic hip fracture.

Authors:  J S Gregory; D Testi; A Stewart; P E Undrill; D M Reid; R M Aspden
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-11-07       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Health-related quality of life in patients with osteopenia or osteoporosis with and without fractures in a geriatric rehabilitation department.

Authors:  Barbara Jahelka; Thomas Dorner; Robert Terkula; Michael Quittan; Hans Bröll; Ludwig Erlacher
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2009-05

8.  [Economic concepts for measuring the costs of illness of osteoporosis: an international comparison].

Authors:  K Viktoria Stein; Thomas Dorner; Kitty Lawrence; Michael Kunze; Anita Rieder
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2009-05

9.  Differences in proximal femur geometry distinguish vertebral from femoral neck fractures in osteoporotic women.

Authors:  S Gnudi; N Malavolta; D Testi; M Viceconti
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  A new value of proximal femur geometry to evaluate hip fracture risk: true moment arm.

Authors:  H Ulusoy; A Bilgici; O Kuru; N Sarica; S Arslan; U Erkorkmaz
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.756

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.