OBJECTIVES: To examine screening strategies for osteoporosis and fractures for treatment of long-term care residents. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis to examine screening strategies for treatment. SETTING: Assisted living and skilled care facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred two frail women aged 65 and older (mean 85), excluding those receiving bisphosphonates. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical fractures of the hip or spine (Clin Fx); Clin Fx or bone mineral density (BMD); Clin Fx, BMD, or vertebral fractures (VF) assessed according to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-based vertebral fracture assessments; fracture risk algorithm using femoral neck BMD (FRAX-FN); fracture risk algorithm using body mass index (FRAX-BMI); or Clin Fx or heel ultrasound (heel US). RESULTS: Treatment eligibility ranged from 17% (Clin Fx) to 98% (FRAX-BMI). VFs were found in 47%, 74% of which were silent. Criteria with Clin Fx, BMD, or VF identified 73% of study participants for treatment. FRAX-FN suggested treatment in 81% but would have missed approximately 10% of individuals with silent VFs. Clin Fx or heel US suggested that 39% of participants were eligible for treatment. CONCLUSION: Long-term care residents eligible for osteoporosis treatment ranged from fewer than 20% to roughly all residents depending on screening criteria. VFs are common and identify a subset of residents missed by conventional BMD scans or FRAX-FN. A reasonable clinical approach could consider treatment for those with Clin Fx of the hip or spine, radiological evidence of a VF, or osteoporosis according to BMD classification. Prospective studies are needed to determine optimal screening strategies for treatment in this cohort.
OBJECTIVES: To examine screening strategies for osteoporosis and fractures for treatment of long-term care residents. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis to examine screening strategies for treatment. SETTING: Assisted living and skilled care facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred two frail women aged 65 and older (mean 85), excluding those receiving bisphosphonates. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical fractures of the hip or spine (Clin Fx); Clin Fx or bone mineral density (BMD); Clin Fx, BMD, or vertebral fractures (VF) assessed according to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-based vertebral fracture assessments; fracture risk algorithm using femoral neckBMD (FRAX-FN); fracture risk algorithm using body mass index (FRAX-BMI); or Clin Fx or heel ultrasound (heel US). RESULTS: Treatment eligibility ranged from 17% (Clin Fx) to 98% (FRAX-BMI). VFs were found in 47%, 74% of which were silent. Criteria with Clin Fx, BMD, or VF identified 73% of study participants for treatment. FRAX-FN suggested treatment in 81% but would have missed approximately 10% of individuals with silent VFs. Clin Fx or heel US suggested that 39% of participants were eligible for treatment. CONCLUSION: Long-term care residents eligible for osteoporosis treatment ranged from fewer than 20% to roughly all residents depending on screening criteria. VFs are common and identify a subset of residents missed by conventional BMD scans or FRAX-FN. A reasonable clinical approach could consider treatment for those with Clin Fx of the hip or spine, radiological evidence of a VF, or osteoporosis according to BMD classification. Prospective studies are needed to determine optimal screening strategies for treatment in this cohort.
Authors: Anna M Sawka; Nofisat Ismaila; Parminder Raina; Lehana Thabane; Sharon Straus; Jonathan D Adachi; Amiram Gafni; Alexandra Papaioannou Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: WanWan Xu; Subashan Perera; Donna Medich; Gail Fiorito; Julie Wagner; Loretta K Berger; Susan L Greenspan Journal: Bone Date: 2010-09-24 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Sundeep Khosla; Teresita M Bellido; Marc K Drezner; Catherine M Gordon; Tamara B Harris; Douglas P Kiel; Barbara E Kream; Meryl S LeBoff; Jane B Lian; Charlotte A Peterson; Clifford J Rosen; John P Williams; Karen K Winer; Sherry S Sherman Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2011-09-13 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Sarah Sullivan; Julie Wagner; Neil M Resnick; Joel Nelson; Subashan K Perera; Susan L Greenspan Journal: J Clin Densitom Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: J M Chandler; S I Zimmerman; C J Girman; A R Martin; W Hawkes; J R Hebel; P D Sloane; L Holder; J Magaziner Journal: JAMA Date: 2000 Aug 23-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gabor Abellan van Kan; Yves Rolland; Mathieu Houles; Sophie Gillette-Guyonnet; Maria Soto; Bruno Vellas Journal: Clin Geriatr Med Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.076
Authors: Steven Boonen; Dennis M Black; Cathleen S Colón-Emeric; Richard Eastell; Jay S Magaziner; Erik Fink Eriksen; Peter Mesenbrink; Patrick Haentjens; Kenneth W Lyles Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2010-01-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Micaela Jantzi; Amy C Maher; George Ioannidis; John P Hirdes; Lora M Giangregorio; Alexandra Papaioannou Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Sharon Kaasalainen; Alexandra Papaioannou; Jennifer Burgess; Mary Lou Van der Horst Journal: Clin Nurs Res Date: 2015-03-29 Impact factor: 2.075
Authors: Susan L Greenspan; Subashan Perera; Mary Anne Ferchak; David A Nace; Neil M Resnick Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Peggy M Cawthon; Thomas G Travison; Todd M Manini; Sheena Patel; Karol M Pencina; Roger A Fielding; Jay M Magaziner; Anne B Newman; Todd Brown; Douglas P Kiel; Steve R Cummings; Michelle Shardell; Jack M Guralnik; Linda J Woodhouse; Marco Pahor; Ellen Binder; Ralph B D'Agostino; Xue Quian-Li; Eric Orwoll; Francesco Landi; Denise Orwig; Laura Schaap; Nancy K Latham; Vasant Hirani; Timothy Kwok; Suzette L Pereira; Daniel Rooks; Makoto Kashiwa; Moises Torres-Gonzalez; Joseph P Menetski; Rosaly Correa-De-Araujo; Shalender Bhasin Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: M S LeBoff; S L Greenspan; K L Insogna; E M Lewiecki; K G Saag; A J Singer; E S Siris Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 5.071