Identifying Patients at Risk for Osteoporotic Fractures
Author Information
Author(s): Johann Steurer, Cyrill Haller, HansJörg Häuselmann, Florian Brunner, Lucas M. Bachmann
Primary Institution: University of Zurich
Hypothesis
Can prognostic instruments effectively identify individuals at higher risk for osteoporotic fractures?
Conclusion
The study highlights the need for consensus on existing risk assessment tools and calls for careful validations and adaptations for local circumstances.
Supporting Evidence
- The review included 35 studies with a total of 609,969 patients.
- Only four studies validated an instrument developed by another group.
- The five most common variables in risk assessment were age, body mass index, bone mass index, past history of falls, and maternal history of fractures.
Takeaway
This study looked at different ways to figure out who might break a bone because of osteoporosis, and found that many tools exist but need better testing.
Methodology
A systematic review of studies on prognostic instruments for osteoporotic fractures was conducted, including data extraction and quality assessment.
Potential Biases
Potential selection bias due to the exclusion of some studies and variability in reporting.
Limitations
The study could not perform a formal meta-analysis and faced substantial variation in study characteristics, outcomes, and follow-up periods.
Participant Demographics
The studies included a diverse population of over 600,000 patients, primarily focusing on postmenopausal women.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website