Literature DB >> 25650086

Fragility fracture: recent developments in risk assessment.

Terry J Aspray1.   

Abstract

More than half of older women who sustain a fragility fracture do not have osteoporosis by World Health Organization (WHO) bone mineral density (BMD) criteria; and, while BMD has been used to assess fracture risk for over 30 years, a range of other skeletal and nonskeletal clinical risk factors (CRFs) for fracture have been recognized. More than 30 assessment tools using CRFs have been developed, some predicting fracture risk and others low BMD alone. Recent systematic reviews have reported that many tools have not been validated against fracture incidence, and that the complexity of tools and the number of CRFs included do not ensure best performance with poor assessment of (internal or comparative) validity. Internationally, FRAX® is the most commonly recommended tool, in addition to QFracture in the UK, The Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada (CAROC) tool in Canada and Garvan in Australia. All tools estimate standard 10-year risk of major osteoporotic and 10-year risk of hip fracture: FRAX® is able to estimate fracture risk either with or without BMD, but CAROC and Garvan both require BMD and QFracture does not. The best evidence for the utility of these tools is in case finding but there may be future prospects for the use of 10-year fracture risk as a common currency with reference to the benefits of treatment, whether pharmacological or lifestyle. The use of this metric is important in supporting health economic analyses. However, further calibration studies will be needed to prove that the tools are robust and that their estimates can be used in supporting treatment decisions, independent of BMD.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FRAX®; Garvan; QFracture; fracture risk assessment; osteoporosis; postmenopausal women

Year:  2015        PMID: 25650086      PMCID: PMC4314300          DOI: 10.1177/1759720X14564562

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis        ISSN: 1759-720X            Impact factor:   5.346


  49 in total

Review 1.  NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy, March 7-29, 2000: highlights of the conference.

Authors: 
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 0.954

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 updates 2012.

Authors:  Eugene McCloskey; John A Kanis
Journal:  Curr Opin Rheumatol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 5.006

4.  Competing mortality and fracture risk assessment.

Authors:  W D Leslie; L M Lix; X Wu
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  FRAX underestimates fracture risk in patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Lora M Giangregorio; William D Leslie; Lisa M Lix; Helena Johansson; Anders Oden; Eugene McCloskey; John A Kanis
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Construction and validation of a simplified fracture risk assessment tool for Canadian women and men: results from the CaMos and Manitoba cohorts.

Authors:  W D Leslie; C Berger; L Langsetmo; L M Lix; J D Adachi; D A Hanley; G Ioannidis; R G Josse; C S Kovacs; T Towheed; S Kaiser; W P Olszynski; J C Prior; S Jamal; N Kreiger; D Goltzman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Simplifying screening for osteoporosis in Australian primary care: the Prospective Screening for Osteoporosis; Australian Primary Care Evaluation of Clinical Tests (PROSPECT) study.

Authors:  Susan R Davis; Catherine Kirby; Andrew Weekes; Alfred Lanzafame; Leon Piterman
Journal:  Menopause       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  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

9.  Instant vertebral assessment: a noninvasive dual X-ray absorptiometry technique to avoid misclassification and clinical mismanagement of osteoporosis.

Authors:  S L Greenspan; E von Stetten; S K Emond; L Jones; R A Parker
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Prediction Models for Osteoporotic Fractures Risk: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.

Authors:  Xuemei Sun; Yancong Chen; Yinyan Gao; Zixuan Zhang; Lang Qin; Jinlu Song; Huan Wang; Irene Xy Wu
Journal:  Aging Dis       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 9.968

2.  External validation and comparison of three prediction tools for risk of osteoporotic fractures using data from population based electronic health records: retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Noa Dagan; Chandra Cohen-Stavi; Maya Leventer-Roberts; Ran D Balicer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-01-19

3.  Effects of the falls and fractures clinic as an integrated multidisciplinary model of care in Australia: a pre-post study.

Authors:  Fernando Gomez; Carmen Lucia Curcio; Sharon Lee Brennan-Olsen; Derek Boersma; Steven Phu; Sara Vogrin; Pushpa Suriyaarachchi; Gustavo Duque
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Predictors of fragility fracture and low bone mineral density in patients with a history of parental fracture.

Authors:  Mrinalini Dey; Marwan Bukhari
Journal:  Osteoporos Sarcopenia       Date:  2019-03-15

5.  Screening to prevent fragility fractures among adults 40 years and older in primary care: protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Michelle Gates; Jennifer Pillay; Guylène Thériault; Heather Limburg; Roland Grad; Scott Klarenbach; Christina Korownyk; Donna Reynolds; John J Riva; Brett D Thombs; Gregory A Kline; William D Leslie; Susan Courage; Ben Vandermeer; Robin Featherstone; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2019-08-23

6.  Body composition and osteoporotic fracture using anthropometric prediction equations to assess muscle and fat masses.

Authors:  Changbin Hong; Seulggie Choi; Minseon Park; Sang Min Park; Gyeongsil Lee
Journal:  J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 12.910

7.  Rationale of the Spanish FRAX model in decision-making for predicting osteoporotic fractures: an update of FRIDEX cohort of Spanish women.

Authors:  Rafael Azagra; Marta Zwart; Gloria Encabo; Amada Aguyé; Juan Carlos Martin-Sánchez; Nuria Puchol-Ruiz; Paula Gabriel-Escoda; Sergio Ortiz-Alinque; Emilio Gené; Milagros Iglesias; David Moriña; Miguel Angel Diaz-Herrera; Mireia Utzet; Josep Maria Manresa
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  History of Previous Fracture and Imminent Fracture Risk in Swedish Women Aged 55 to 90 Years Presenting With a Fragility Fracture.

Authors:  Emese Toth; Jonas Banefelt; Kristina Åkesson; Anna Spångeus; Gustaf Ortsäter; Cesar Libanati
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 6.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.