Literature DB >> 33635451

FRAX score with and without bone mineral density: a comparison and factors affecting the discordance in osteoporosis treatment in Thais.

Napassorn Teeratakulpisarn1, Suranut Charoensri2, Daris Theerakulpisut3, Chatlert Pongchaiyakul4.   

Abstract

We investigate the rate of concordance between treatment recommendations of osteoporosis with 10-year probability of hip fracture calculated using FRAX scores with and without BMD. We found that predictions were concordant in 83.8% of patients. However, older age, lower BMD, and FRAX without BMD around the intervention threshold were associated with discordant results. In the discordant group, FRAX with BMD suggested treatment in more participants with lower age, higher BMI, and lower BMD when compared with FRAX without BMD.
INTRODUCTION: The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) is used to calculate the 10-year probability of fracture using important clinical factors, with bone mineral density (BMD) as an optional input variable. We aimed to determine the rate of concordance between treatment recommendations of osteoporosis with 10-year probability of hip fracture calculated using FRAX scores with and without BMD and to identify relevant clinical risk factors associated with discordance.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in patients between 40 and 90 years of age who were screened for osteoporosis by BMD measurement using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) from 2010 to 2018 at a university hospital in Thailand. A FRAX questionnaire was administered to determine demographic data and osteoporotic risk factors. FRAX scores with and without BMD were calculated for each participant using the Thai reference, and patients were categorized into either the treatment or non-treatment group based on a cut-off of 3% 10-year probability of hip fracture. When FRAX scores with and without BMD results were consistent, they were considered concordant. Otherwise, they were deemed discordant. Clinical risk factors were compared between the concordant and discordant groups.
RESULTS: A total of 3545 participants were included in the study. The majority (83.8%) were in the concordant group. However, older age, lower BMD, and FRAX without BMD around the intervention threshold were significantly associated with discordant results. In the discordant group, FRAX with BMD suggested treatment in more participants with lower age, higher BMI, and lower BMD when compared with FRAX without BMD.
CONCLUSION: FRAX scores with and without BMD yielded concordant predictions regarding the 10-year probability of hip fracture suggesting pharmacological treatment. However, this concordance declined in elderly and osteoporotic participants and in those with FRAX without BMD around intervention threshold. BMD data may be required in these populations in order to facilitate accurate risk assessment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone mineral density; Discordance; FRAX; Osteoporosis

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33635451     DOI: 10.1007/s11657-021-00911-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Osteoporos            Impact factor:   2.617


  20 in total

1.  Prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis in Thai women.

Authors:  K K Limpaphayom; N Taechakraichana; U Jaisamrarn; S Bunyavejchevin; S Chaikittisilpa; M Poshyachinda; C Taechamahachai; P Havanond; Y Onthuam; P Lumbiganon; P Kamolratanakul
Journal:  Menopause       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Frax prediction without BMD for assessment of osteoporotic fracture risk.

Authors:  Ramesh Keerthi Gadam; Karen Schlauch; Kenneth E Izuora
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.443

3.  Long-term mortality after osteoporotic hip fracture in Chiang Mai, Thailand.

Authors:  Tanawat Vaseenon; Sirichai Luevitoonvechkij; Prasit Wongtriratanachai; Sattaya Rojanasthien
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2010 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.617

4.  Hip fracture in women without osteoporosis.

Authors:  Stacey A Wainwright; Lynn M Marshall; Kristine E Ensrud; Jane A Cauley; Dennis M Black; Teresa A Hillier; Marc C Hochberg; Molly T Vogt; Eric S Orwoll
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2005-02-22       Impact factor: 5.958

5.  Experimental neuropathy in rats made diabetic with alloxan.

Authors:  R E Lovelace
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1968-10

6.  The diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Authors:  J A Kanis; L J Melton; C Christiansen; C C Johnston; N Khaltaev
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Classification of osteoporosis based on bone mineral densities.

Authors:  Y Lu; H K Genant; J Shepherd; S Zhao; A Mathur; T P Fuerst; S R Cummings
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men from the age of 50 years in the UK.

Authors:  J Compston; A Cooper; C Cooper; R Francis; J A Kanis; D Marsh; E V McCloskey; D M Reid; P Selby; M Wilkins
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 9.  Osteoporotic Fracture: 2015 Position Statement of the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Authors:  Je-Hyun Yoo; Seong-Hwan Moon; Yong-Chan Ha; Dong Yeon Lee; Hyun Sik Gong; Si Young Park; Kyu Hyun Yang
Journal:  J Bone Metab       Date:  2015-11-30

Review 10.  Thai Osteoporosis Foundation (TOPF) position statements on management of osteoporosis.

Authors:  T Songpatanasilp; C Sritara; W Kittisomprayoonkul; S Chaiumnuay; H Nimitphong; N Charatcharoenwitthaya; C Pongchaiyakul; S Namwongphrom; T Kitumnuaypong; W Srikam; P Dajpratham; V Kuptniratsaikul; U Jaisamrarn; K Tachatraisak; S Rojanasthien; P Damrongwanich; W Wajanavisit; S Pongprapai; B Ongphiphadhanakul; N Taechakraichana
Journal:  Osteoporos Sarcopenia       Date:  2016-12-10
View more
  1 in total

1.  Application of a Machine Learning Technology in the Definition of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Status: A Retrospective Study of 2567 Subjects Suffering from Obesity with or without Metabolic Syndrome.

Authors:  Davide Masi; Renata Risi; Filippo Biagi; Daniel Vasquez Barahona; Mikiko Watanabe; Rita Zilich; Gabriele Gabrielli; Pierluigi Santin; Stefania Mariani; Carla Lubrano; Lucio Gnessi
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 5.717

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.