Simplified system for absolute fracture risk assessment: Clinical validation in Canadian women

32Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Absolute 10-yr fracture risk based on multiple factors is the preferred method for risk assessment. A simplified risk assessment system from sex, age, DXA, and two clinical risk factors (CRFs) - prior fracture and systemic corticosteroid (CS) use - has been used in Canada since 2005. This study was undertaken to evaluate this system in the Canadian female population. A total of 16,205 women >50 yr of age at the time of baseline BMD (1998-2002) were identified in a database containing all clinical DXA test results for the Province of Manitoba, Canada. Basal 10-yr fracture risk from age and minimum T-score (lumbar spine, femur neck, trochanter, total hip) was categorized as low (<10%), moderate (10-20%), or high (>20%). Health service records since 1987 were assessed for prior fracture codes (N = 5224), recent major CS use (N = 616), and fracture codes after BMD testing (mean, 3.1 yr of follow-up) for the hip, vertebrae, forearm, or humerus (designated osteoporotic, N = 757). Fracture risk predicted from age and minimum T-score alone showed a significant gradient in observed fracture rates (low 5.1 [95% CI, 4.1-6.4], moderate 11.5 [95% CI, 10.1-13.0], high 25.4 [95% CI, 23.2-27.9] per 1000 person-years; p-for-trend <0.0001). There was an incremental increase in incident fracture rates from a prior fracture (13.9 [95% CI, 11.3-16.4] per 1000 person-years) or major CS use (11.2 [95% CI, 4.1-18.2] per 1000 person-years). This simplified fracture risk assessment system provides an assessment of fracture risk that is consistent with observed fracture rates. © 2009 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Leslie, W. D., Tsang, J. F., & Lix, L. M. (2009). Simplified system for absolute fracture risk assessment: Clinical validation in Canadian women. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 24(2), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.081012

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free