Literature DB >> 24820144

FRAX fracture risk in women with a recent fracture of the distal forearm: agreement between assessments with and without bone mineral density and impact of measurement side in the individual patient.

Emilie Lund Egsmose1, Mette Birkvig, Thora Buhl, Ole Rintek Madsen.   

Abstract

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been developed by the World Health Organization to evaluate the 10-year risk of a hip fracture and a major osteoporotic fracture. We examined the agreement between fracture risk calculated with and without femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) in individual patients and the impact of BMD measurement side. Bilateral femoral neck BMD results obtained by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and clinical risk factor data from 140 women (age 66 ± 8 years) with a recent distal forearm fracture were used for FRAX analyses. Discrepancies between pairs of risk assessments were analysed by the Bland-Altman method. Agreement on the individual level was expressed as 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and on the group level as the mean (or median) of intra-individual differences (the bias). The femoral neck T-score was -1.69 ± 0.87 (hip with lowest BMD value). The risk of a major fracture and a hip fracture based on the lowest femoral neck BMD value was 23.8 ± 21.4% and 7.6 ± 8.3%, respectively. For major fracture risk assessed without versus with the lowest BMD value, lower and upper LoA were -12.3 and 21.1 percentage points (pp) (bias 4.4 pp, p < 0.0001). The corresponding LoA for hip fracture risk were -11.6 and18.6 pp (bias 3.5 pp, p < 0.0001). LoA for major fracture risk assessed with the lowest versus the highest BMD value were 0.0 and 9.5 pp (bias 2.0, p < 0.0001), and correspondingly for hip fracture risk 0.0 and 9.5 pp (bias 1.0 pp, p < 0.0001). Intra-individual differences increased with increasing fracture risk. In conclusion, the 10-year fracture risk calculated without BMD was on the average slightly overestimated compared to calculations with BMD. On the individual patient level differences between fracture risk assessments with and without BMD were pronounced. The side of BMD measurement may also significantly influence the risk assessment result in individual patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24820144     DOI: 10.1007/s10067-014-2640-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Rheumatol        ISSN: 0770-3198            Impact factor:   2.980


  32 in total

Review 1.  Design, analysis, and interpretation of method-comparison studies.

Authors:  Sandra K Hanneman
Journal:  AACN Adv Crit Care       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun

2.  Measurement error and correlation coefficients.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-07-06

Review 3.  FRAX(®) with and without bone mineral density.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Eugene McCloskey; Helena Johansson; Anders Oden; William D Leslie
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2011-11-06       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Test-retest reliability of disease activity core set measures and indices in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  T Uhlig; T K Kvien; T Pincus
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2008-10-28       Impact factor: 19.103

6.  Application of the National Osteoporosis Foundation Guidelines to postmenopausal women and men: the Framingham Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  S D Berry; D P Kiel; M G Donaldson; S R Cummings; J A Kanis; H Johansson; E J Samelson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.507

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.  International variations in hip fracture probabilities: implications for risk assessment.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Olof Johnell; Chris De Laet; Bengt Jonsson; Anders Oden; Alan K Ogelsby
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Low-energy distal radius fractures in middle-aged and elderly men and women--the burden of osteoporosis and fracture risk : A study of 1794 consecutive patients.

Authors:  J Øyen; C G Gjesdal; C Brudvik; L M Hove; E M Apalset; H C Gulseth; G Haugeberg
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Prevalence and Risk Factors of Discordance between Left- and Right-Hip Bone Mineral Density Using DXA.

Authors:  Aziza Mounach; Asmaa Rezqi; Imad Ghozlani; Lahsen Achemlal; Ahmed Bezza; Abdellah El Maghraoui
Journal:  ISRN Rheumatol       Date:  2012-06-17
View more
  2 in total

1.  Stability of clinical outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis patients with stable disease defined on the basis of the EULAR response criteria.

Authors:  Ole Rintek Madsen
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  A combination of clinical balance measures and FRAX® to improve identification of high-risk fallers.

Authors:  David A Najafi; Leif E Dahlberg; Eva Ekvall Hansson
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 3.921

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.