Takuya Umehara1, Akinori Kaneguchi2, Keita Watanabe3, Nobuhisa Katayama3, Daisuke Kuwahara4, Ryo Kaneyashiki4, Nobuhiro Kito2, Masayuki Kakehashi5. 1. Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Hiroshima International University, Kurose-Gakuendai 555-36, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan. start.ume0421@gmail.com. 2. Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Hiroshima International University, Kurose-Gakuendai 555-36, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan. 3. Department of Rehabilitation, Kure Kyosai Hospital, Nishichuo 2-3-28, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan. 4. Department of Rehabilitation, Saiseikai Kure Hospital, Sanjo 2-1-13, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan. 5. Department of Health Informatics, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Kasumi 1-2-3, Hiroshima Minami-ku, Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Both hip fracture and bone mineral density (BMD) decline on the non-fractured side are more likely to occur within 1 year. However, there are no longitudinal study reports on the factors associated with BMD maintenance or improvement within the first year after hip fracture. This study aimed to investigate the factors influencing the neck BMD maintenance or improvement in patients with hip fractures from within 2 weeks-6 months after surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were hip fracture after surgery and were divided into two groups: Among neck BMD changes (6 months minus 2 weeks after surgery) were calculated. Based on among neck BMD change, patients were classified into the BMD maintenance or improvement (change ≥ 0) and the BMD decrease groups (change < 0). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors. To predict the factors affecting neck BMD, hierarchical logistic regression analysis was performed. The dependent variable was the BMD maintenance or improvement group and the BMD decrease group. The independent variables were basic and medical information, and physical functions. RESULTS: The hierarchical logistic regression analysis results showed that movement control during one-leg standing affected femoral neck BMD independently from age, sex. The odds ratio for movement control during one-leg standing was 8.22. The discrimination rate of the model was 69.7%. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that adequate movement control during one-leg standing is important to maintain or improve neck BMD.
INTRODUCTION: Both hip fracture and bone mineral density (BMD) decline on the non-fractured side are more likely to occur within 1 year. However, there are no longitudinal study reports on the factors associated with BMD maintenance or improvement within the first year after hip fracture. This study aimed to investigate the factors influencing the neck BMD maintenance or improvement in patients with hip fractures from within 2 weeks-6 months after surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were hip fracture after surgery and were divided into two groups: Among neck BMD changes (6 months minus 2 weeks after surgery) were calculated. Based on among neck BMD change, patients were classified into the BMD maintenance or improvement (change ≥ 0) and the BMD decrease groups (change < 0). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors. To predict the factors affecting neck BMD, hierarchical logistic regression analysis was performed. The dependent variable was the BMD maintenance or improvement group and the BMD decrease group. The independent variables were basic and medical information, and physical functions. RESULTS: The hierarchical logistic regression analysis results showed that movement control during one-leg standing affected femoral neck BMD independently from age, sex. The odds ratio for movement control during one-leg standing was 8.22. The discrimination rate of the model was 69.7%. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that adequate movement control during one-leg standing is important to maintain or improve neck BMD.
Authors: R Lindsay; S L Silverman; C Cooper; D A Hanley; I Barton; S B Broy; A Licata; L Benhamou; P Geusens; K Flowers; H Stracke; E Seeman Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-01-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Bente L Langdahl; Christence Stubbe Teglbjærg; Pei-Ran Ho; Roland Chapurlat; Edward Czerwinski; David L Kendler; Jean-Yves Reginster; Alan Kivitz; E Michael Lewiecki; Paul D Miller; Michael A Bolognese; Michael R McClung; Henry G Bone; Östen Ljunggren; Bo Abrahamsen; Ugis Gruntmanis; Yu-Ching Yang; Rachel B Wagman; Faisal Mirza; Suresh Siddhanti; Eric Orwoll Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: O Johnell; J A Kanis; A Odén; I Sernbo; I Redlund-Johnell; C Petterson; C De Laet; B Jönsson Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-12-23 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Kristine E Ensrud; Susan K Ewing; Brent C Taylor; Howard A Fink; Katie L Stone; Jane A Cauley; J Kathleen Tracy; Marc C Hochberg; Nicolas Rodondi; Peggy M Cawthon Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Jeremiah Clinton; Amy Franta; Nayak L Polissar; Blazej Neradilek; Doug Mounce; Howard A Fink; John T Schousboe; Frederick A Matsen Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2009-03-01 Impact factor: 5.284