| Literature DB >> 32300704 |
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to examine the correlation between tobacco smoking and hip fractures. The literature that was used for this article was based on studies that investigated not only the direct correlation between smoking and hip fractures but also the effect of smoking on bone mineral density. In general, the incidence of hip fracture was found to be higher in current smokers in both genders. Compared with never smokers, former smokers had a slightly higher risk of hip fracture that was inversely proportional to the cessation span. The relative risk (RR) of hip fracture in current male smokers was higher than the RR for nonsmokers (never and former smokers). In postmenopausal women former and current smoking increased the RR. In premenopausal and postmenopausal women, cessation of smoking decreases the risk of hip fracture. Risk rises with greater cigarette consumption. Risk declines among former smokers, but the benefit is not observed until 10 years after cessation. Copyright:Entities:
Keywords: Current smoker; Former smoker; Hip fracture; Non-smokers; Smoking
Year: 2018 PMID: 32300704 PMCID: PMC7155346 DOI: 10.22540/JFSF-03-148
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Frailty Sarcopenia Falls ISSN: 2459-4148
Basic characteristics of the main studies used in this review.
| Author | Study | Country | Year | Number of Participants | Subject |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forsen et al.[ | Cohort | Norway | 1998 | 35767 | M +W |
| Høidrup et al.[ | Cohort | Denmark | 2000 | 30772 | M + W |
| Cornuz et al.[ | Cohort | Switzerland | 1999 | 116229 | W |
| Hemenway et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 1994 | 50000 | M |
| Cummings et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 1995 | 9516 | W |
| Mussolino et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 1998 | 2879 | M |
| Jutberger et al.[ | Cohort | Sweden | 2010 | 1412 | M |
| Jenkins et al.[ | Case-control | Texas, USA | 2008 | 190 | W |
| Trimpou et al.[ | Cohort | Sweden | 2010 | 7495 | M |
| Baron et al.[ | Case-control | Sweden | 2001 | 5669 | W |
| Høidrup et al.[ | Cohort | Denmark | 1999 | 6159 | W |
| Cauley et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 2016 | 5994 | M |
| Grisso et al.[ | Case-control | USA | 1997 | 758 | M |
| Holmberg et al.[ | Cohort | Sweden | 2006 | 22444 | M |
| Paganini-Hill et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 1991 | 13649 | M + W |
| Cumming et al.[ | Case-control | Australia | 1994 | 419 | M + W |
| Stolee et al.[ | Cohort | Canada | 2009 | 40276 | M + W |
| Melhus et al.[ | Cohort | Sweden | 1999 | 66651 | W |
| Olofsson et al.[ | Cohort | Sweden | 2005 | 2322 | M |
| Robbins et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 2007 | 93676 | W |
| Koh et al.[ | Cohort | Singapore | 2009 | 63257 | M + W |
| La Vecchia et al.[ | Case-control | Italy | 1991 | 1658 | W |
| Kreiger et al.[ | Case-control | Canada | 1992 | 533 | W |
| Michaëlsson et al.[ | Case-control | Sweden | 1995 | 1140 | W |
| Meyer et al.[ | Cohort | Norway | 1993 | 52313 | M + W |
| Fors. et al.[ | Cohort | Norway | 1994 | 38356 | M + W |
| Thorin et al.[ | Prospective | Sweden | 2015 | 1044 | W |
| Kiel et al.[ | Cohort | USA | 1992 | 2872 | W |
| Johnell et al.[ | Case-control | South Europe (Multicentral) | 1995 | 5618 | W |
| Jaglal et al.[ | Case-control | Canada | 1993 | 1919 | W |
| Oyen et al.[ | Cohort | Norway | 2014 | 5094 | M + W |
M=Men, W=Women,
Shows the sum of the subjects with fracture and the individuals from the control group.
General characteristics of the included prospective cohort studies.
| First Author | Duration (years) | Size | Mean age (range) | Smoking Status (years) | Number of fractured patients | Adjusted Relative Risk (95% CI) | Study Quality | Adjustment for Covariates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paganini-Hill[ | 7 | 5049 | 73 | Former | 50 | 1.16(0.73-1.86) | 7 | Age |
| Current | 9 | 2.23(1.04-4.8) | ||||||
| Current* | NA | 1.94(0.96-3.94) | ||||||
| Meyer[ | 11 | 27015 | 35-49 | Former | 14 | 1.25(0.56-2.81) | 8 | Age |
| Current (1-14) | 14 | 0.93(0.41-2.09) | ||||||
| Current (≥ 15) | 19 | 1.81(0.84-3.89) | ||||||
| Forsen[ | 3 | 18198 | ≥ 50 | Current* | 136 | 1.8(1.2-2.9) | 9 | Age, leanness, poor health, physical inactivity, self- repoted |
| Hemenway[ | 6 | 50000 | 40-75 | Former | 29 | 1.05(0.61-1.81) | 7 | Alcohol, BMI, Height, smoking status |
| Current | 6 | 1.08(0.44-2.67) | ||||||
| Mussolino[ | 14 | 2879 | ≥ 45 | Current | 71 | 1.45(0.86-2.42) | 7 | Alcohol, chronic disease, calcium intake, calories, physical activity, protein intake, smoking status |
| Forsen[ | 3 | 14428 | 50-64 | Former | 4 | 2.3(0.3-21) | 7 | Age, BMI, physical inactive, subjective health |
| Current | 11 | 4(0.5-32) | ||||||
| 65-74 | Former | 11 | 4.3(1.0-20) | |||||
| Current | 13 | 5.3(1.2-25) | ||||||
| ≥ 75 | Former | 15 | 1.1(0.5-2.3) | |||||
| Current | 18 | 1.6(0.8-3.3) | ||||||
| Hoidrup[ | 5-13 | 17379 | 20-93 | Current | 316 | 1.59(1.04-2.43) | 8 | Age, alcohol, BMI, menopausal age, physical activity, study of origin, school education |
| Former | 100 | 1.16(0.74-1.83) | ||||||
| Olofsson[ | 30 | 2322 | 71 | Current | 96 | 3.03(1.02-3.44) | 8 | Age, alcogol, BMI, chronic diseases, physical activity, marital status, socioeconomic class |
| Former | NA | 1.87(1.02-3.44) | ||||||
| Holmberg[ | 16 | 22444 | 44 | Current* | 163 | 2.20(1.54-3.15) | 7 | Age, BMI, diabetes, smoking, self-rated health |
| Koh[ | 7 | 27913 | 71.4 | Former | 80 | 1.27(0.93-1.72) | 6 | Age, education, work or sports, year of recruitment |
| Current | 107 | 1.23(0.92-1.64) | ||||||
| Stolee[ | 10 | 13773 | 81.5 | Current | 223 | 1.58(1.03-2.42) | 6 | NA |
| Jutberger[ | 3 | 1412 | 69-80 | Current | 38 | 2.34(0.97-5.65) | 8 | Age, BMD, BMI, calcium intake, glucocorticoid treatment, physical activity |
| Trimpou[ | 30 | 7495 | 46-56 | Former | 86 | 1.06 (0.81-1.40) | 8 | Age, alcohol, tall stature, low occupational class, interim stroke or dementia, smoking |
| Current | 234 | 1.58 (1.27-1.96) | ||||||
| Cauley[ | 8.6 | 5994 | >65 | Current | 97 | 2.05 (1.05-3.98) | 7 | Age, BMD, clinic, race |
BMD: Bone Mineral Density, BMI: Body Mass Index, NA: Not Available. Current*: Current smokers compared with nonsmokers (never and former smokers). The numbers under “Study Quality” refer to the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale with 9 being the optimum.