Literature DB >> 23907573

Is lower income associated with an increased likelihood of qualification for treatment for osteoporosis in Canadian women?

S L Brennan1, W D Leslie, L M Lix.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We examined whether low income was associated with an increased likelihood of treatment qualification for osteoporotic fracture probability determined by Canada FRAX in women aged ≥50 years. A significant negative linear association was observed between income and treatment qualification when FRAX included bone mineral density (BMD), which may have implications for clinical practice.
INTRODUCTION: Lower income has been associated with increased fracture risk. We examined whether lower income in women was associated with an increased likelihood of treatment qualification determined by Canada FRAX®.
METHODS: We calculated 10-year FRAX probabilities in 51,327 Canadian women aged ≥50 years undergoing baseline BMD measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry 1996-2001. FRAX probabilities for hip fracture ≥3% or major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) ≥20 % were used to define treatment qualification. Mean household income from Canada Census 2006 public use files was used to categorize the population into quintiles. Logistic regression analyses were used to model the association between income and treatment qualification.
RESULTS: Percentages of women who qualified for treatment based upon high hip fracture probability increased linearly with declining income quintile (all p trend <0.001), but this was partially explained by older age among lower income quintiles (p trend <0.001). Compared to the highest income quintile, women in the lowest income quintile had a greater likelihood of treatment qualification based upon high hip fracture probability determined with BMD (age-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.23-1.47) or high MOF fracture probability determined with BMD (age-adjusted OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.18-1.46). Differences were nonsignificant when FRAX was determined without BMD, implying that BMD differences may be the primary explanatory factor.
CONCLUSIONS: FRAX determined with BMD identifies a larger proportion of lower income women as qualifying for treatment than higher income women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23907573     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-013-2467-6

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


  32 in total

1.  Revisiting the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation and its population-based health information system.

Authors:  N P Roos; E Shapiro
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary.

Authors:  Alexandra Papaioannou; Suzanne Morin; Angela M Cheung; Stephanie Atkinson; Jacques P Brown; Sidney Feldman; David A Hanley; Anthony Hodsman; Sophie A Jamal; Stephanie M Kaiser; Brent Kvern; Kerry Siminoski; William D Leslie
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-10-12       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  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

4.  Incident hip fracture and social disadvantage in an Australian population aged 50 years or greater.

Authors:  S L Brennan; M J Henry; M A Kotowicz; G C Nicholson; Y Zhang; J A Pasco
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  The role of socioeconomic status on hip fracture.

Authors:  D S Zingmond; N F Soohoo; S L Silverman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Social disadvantage and cardiovascular disease: development of an index and analysis of age, sex, and ethnicity effects.

Authors:  Sonia S Anand; Fahad Razak; A D Davis; Ruby Jacobs; Vlad Vuksan; Koon Teo; Salim Yusuf
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-08-22       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  Occurrence of hip fractures and socioeconomic position.

Authors:  W E Bacon; W C Hadden
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2000-05

8.  The potential impact of new National Osteoporosis Foundation guidance on treatment patterns.

Authors:  B Dawson-Hughes; A C Looker; A N A Tosteson; H Johansson; J A Kanis; L J Melton
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Risk factors for hip fracture in a high incidence area: a case-control study from Oslo, Norway.

Authors:  H E Meyer; C Henriksen; J A Falch; J I Pedersen; A Tverdal
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Hip fractures and area level socioeconomic conditions: a population-based study.

Authors:  Andrea Icks; Burkhard Haastert; Manfred Wildner; Clemens Becker; Kilian Rapp; Nico Dragano; Gabriele Meyer; Joachim Rosenbauer
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-04-27       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  4 in total

1.  Fracture prediction from repeat BMD measurements in clinical practice.

Authors:  W D Leslie; S L Brennan-Olsen; S N Morin; L M Lix
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Socioeconomic disparities in osteoporosis prevalence: different results in the overall Korean adult population and single-person households.

Authors:  Jungmee Kim; Joongyub Lee; Ju-Young Shin; Byung-Joo Park
Journal:  J Prev Med Public Health       Date:  2015-03-06

3.  Risk of Vertebral Fracture in Patients Diagnosed with a Depressive Disorder: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.

Authors:  Shyh-Chyang Lee; Li-Yu Hu; Min-Wei Huang; Cheng-Che Shen; Wei-Lun Huang; Ti Lu; Chiao-Lin Hsu; Chih-Chuan Pan
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 2.365

4.  The relationship between patients' income and education and their access to pharmacological chronic pain management: A scoping review.

Authors:  Nicole Atkins; Karim Mukhida
Journal:  Can J Pain       Date:  2022-09-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.