Evaluation of the quality of life of postmenopausal osteoporotic and osteopenic women with or without fractures

28Citations
Citations of this article
43Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: Most studies concerned with the quality of life (QoL) of women with reduced bone mineral density (BMD) focus on patients with vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. Our objective was to evaluate QoL among patients with reduced BMD regardless of their fracture history compared to women with normal BMD. Material and methods: Eighty-five patients in the study group were classified as osteoporotic, with BMD results measured by densitometry and expressed by T-score ≤-2.5 SD, 122 women were osteopenic, with-2.5 < T-score ≤-1.0 SD, and 97 subjects were assessed as normal, with T-score >-1.0 SD. Mean ages of women according to groups were 59.90, 57.67 and 55.68, respectively. Assessment of life quality was conducted using the Polish version of the QUALEFFO-41 scale. Results: The ratings in the assessment (QUALEFFO-41) of QoL were lower for osteoporotic and osteopenic women than for the normal BMD group with regard to pain (p = 0.006), social function (p = 0.001), health perception (p = 0.001), and mental function (p = 0.001). For total QUALEFFO-41 the associated factors were: secondary and higher education (OR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.29-0.82), self-perceived deformity of the back (OR = 4.09; 95% CI: 1.88-8.93), previous fractures (OR = 2.52; 95% CI: 1.09-5.82), reduced height (OR = 2.48; 95% CI: 1.13-5.39) and anxiety (OR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.21-1.66). Conclusions: It seems necessary to evaluate QoL of women with reduced BMD before fractures occur, to aid development of health education aiming to reduce the incidence of osteoporosis and prevent fractures.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baczyk, G., Samborski, W., & Jaracz, K. (2016). Evaluation of the quality of life of postmenopausal osteoporotic and osteopenic women with or without fractures. Archives of Medical Science, 12(4), 819–827. https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2015.55012

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