Introduction: Osteoporosis is one of the major fundamental causes of fractures in individuals over 50 years old. Preventing the first fragility fracture is the most cost-effective strategy for addressing osteoporosis. Therefore, identifying individuals with a high risk of developing osteoporotic fractures is important to save limited medical resources. The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been used globally for assessing fracture risk. However, the accuracy of FRAX still needs to be improved partially because of the differences in race and socioeconomic status among nationalities. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of FRAX in Chinese people. The factors not involved in FRAX were also evaluated for a correlation with osteoporotic fracture risks. Results: Age, smoking status, alcohol intake, family history of osteoporotic fracture, diabetes mellitus type II, Charlson Index, vitamin D intake, calcium intake, muscle strength, modified Barthel Index, the 3-level version of EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire, and bone mineral density demonstrated significant differences between the fracture and control groups. Our results also demonstrated that dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-diagnosed osteoporosis (T ≤ −2.5) was the independent fracture risk factor. The effects of age, muscle strength, and Charlson Index on DEXA were found to be statistically significant. People old over 60, muscle strength test supine leg lift less than 20 times per minute, aCCI scores greater than or equal to 2, had lower DEXA T values (T ≤ −2.5). Discussion: This work was a single-center study, showed social economic status bias, and featured a limited number of cases. Therefore, multi-center studies are necessary in the future. Conclusions: This study revealed that FRAX should be improved further in combination with other risk factors, including aCCI, calcium intake, and muscle strength.
| Published in | American Journal of Health Research (Volume 9, Issue 5) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18 |
| Page(s) | 198-203 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Osteoporosis, Fracture, FRAX, Risk Factor
| [1] | Ensrud KE, Crandall CJ. Osteoporosis. Ann Intern Med. 2017; 167 (3): ITC17-ITC31. doi: 10.7326/AITC201708010. |
| [2] | Fuggle NR, Curtis EM, Ward KA, Harvey NC, Dennison EM, Cooper C. Fracture prediction, imaging and screening in osteoporosis. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2019; 15 (9): 535-547. doi: 10.1038/s41574-019-0220-8. |
| [3] | Liu J, Curtis EM, Cooper C, Harvey NC. State of the art in osteoporosis risk assessment and treatment. J Endocrinol Invest. Published online 2019. doi: 10.1007/s40618-019-01041-6. |
| [4] | Feehan J, Al Saedi A, Duque G. Targeting fundamental aging mechanisms to treat osteoporosis. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2019; 23 (12): 1031-1039. doi: 10.1080/14728222.2019.1702973. |
| [5] | Aspray TJ, Hill TR. Osteoporosis and the ageing skeleton. Subcell Biochem. 2019; 91: 453-476. doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-3681-2_16. |
| [6] | Chinese Society of Osteoporosis and Bone Mineral Research, Chinese Medical Association, Epidemiological survey of osteoporosis in China and release of the results of "healthy Skeleton, special action”, Chin J Osteoporosis & Bone Miner Res, 2019; 12 (4): 317-318. |
| [7] | Niempoog S, Sukkarnkosol S, Boontanapibul K. Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with distal radius fracture from low-energy trauma. Malaysian Orthop J. 2019; 13 (3): 15-20. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.1911.003. |
| [8] | González-Quevedo D, Bautista-Enrique D, Pérez-del-Río V, Bravo-Bardají M, García-de-Quevedo D, Tamimi I. Fracture liaison service and mortality in elderly hip fracture patients: a prospective cohort study. Osteoporos Int. 2020; 31 (1): 77-84. doi: 10.1007/s00198-019-05153-w. |
| [9] | Kerschan-Schindl K. Prävention und Rehabilitation der Osteoporose. Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift. 2016; 166 (1-2): 22-27. doi: 10.1007/s10354-015-0417-y. |
| [10] | Iconaru L, Moreau M, Kinnard V, et al. Does the Prediction Accuracy of Osteoporotic Fractures by BMD and Clinical Risk Factors Vary With Fracture Site? JBMR Plus. 2019; 3 (12): e10238. doi: 10.1002/jbm4.10238. |
| [11] | Kanis JA, Harvey NC, Johansson H, et al. A decade of FRAX: how has it changed the management of osteoporosis? Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020; 32 (2): 187-196. doi: 10.1007/s40520-019-01432-y. |
| [12] | Lekamwasam S. The diversity of Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)-based intervention thresholds in Asia. Osteoporos Sarcopenia. 2019; 5 (4): 104-108. doi: 10.1016/j.afos.2019.12.002. |
| [13] | Liu S, Chen R, Ding N, et al. Setting the new FRAX reference threshold without bone mineral density in Chinese postmenopausal women. J Endocrinol Invest. 2020; (0123456789). doi: 10.1007/s40618-020-01315-4. |
| [14] | Cheung C-L. FRAX-based intervention thresholds in Asia: Now and future. Osteoporos Sarcopenia. 2019; 5 (4): 103. doi: 10.1016/j.afos.2019.12.003. |
| [15] | Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, et al. 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010; 69 (9): 1580-1588. doi: 10.1136/ard.2010.138461. |
| [16] | Lai EL, Huang WN, Chen HH, et al. Ten-year fracture risk by FRAX and osteoporotic fractures in patients with systemic autoimmune diseases. Lupus. 2019; 28 (8): 945-953. doi: 10.1177/0961203319855122. |
| [17] | Kanis JA. An update on the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2000; 2 (1): 62-66. doi: 10.1007/s11926-996-0070-y. |
| [18] | de Abreu LLF, Holloway-Kew KL, Sajjad MA, Kotowicz MA, Pasco JA. FRAX (Australia) scores in women with impaired fasting glucose and diabetes. Bone Reports. 2019; 11 (July): 100223. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2019.100223. |
| [19] | Povoroznyuk V V., Grygorieva N V., Kanis JA, et al. Epidemiology of hip fracture and the development of FRAX in Ukraine. Arch Osteoporos. 2017; 12 (1). doi: 10.1007/s11657-017-0343-2. |
| [20] | Montori VM, Shah ND, Pencille LJ, et al. Use of a decision aid to improve treatment decisions in osteoporosis: The osteoporosis choice randomized trial. Am J Med. Published online 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.01.013. |
APA Style
Xiao Li, Jun Wu, Xiang Li, Ka Li Frankie Leung, Tak Man Wong, et al. (2021). Evaluation of Risk Factors for Primary Fracture in Elderly Patients with Osteoporosis. American Journal of Health Research, 9(5), 198-203. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18
ACS Style
Xiao Li; Jun Wu; Xiang Li; Ka Li Frankie Leung; Tak Man Wong, et al. Evaluation of Risk Factors for Primary Fracture in Elderly Patients with Osteoporosis. Am. J. Health Res. 2021, 9(5), 198-203. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18
AMA Style
Xiao Li, Jun Wu, Xiang Li, Ka Li Frankie Leung, Tak Man Wong, et al. Evaluation of Risk Factors for Primary Fracture in Elderly Patients with Osteoporosis. Am J Health Res. 2021;9(5):198-203. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18,
author = {Xiao Li and Jun Wu and Xiang Li and Ka Li Frankie Leung and Tak Man Wong and Xinshuo Christian Fang},
title = {Evaluation of Risk Factors for Primary Fracture in Elderly Patients with Osteoporosis},
journal = {American Journal of Health Research},
volume = {9},
number = {5},
pages = {198-203},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajhr.20210905.18},
abstract = {Introduction: Osteoporosis is one of the major fundamental causes of fractures in individuals over 50 years old. Preventing the first fragility fracture is the most cost-effective strategy for addressing osteoporosis. Therefore, identifying individuals with a high risk of developing osteoporotic fractures is important to save limited medical resources. The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been used globally for assessing fracture risk. However, the accuracy of FRAX still needs to be improved partially because of the differences in race and socioeconomic status among nationalities. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of FRAX in Chinese people. The factors not involved in FRAX were also evaluated for a correlation with osteoporotic fracture risks. Results: Age, smoking status, alcohol intake, family history of osteoporotic fracture, diabetes mellitus type II, Charlson Index, vitamin D intake, calcium intake, muscle strength, modified Barthel Index, the 3-level version of EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire, and bone mineral density demonstrated significant differences between the fracture and control groups. Our results also demonstrated that dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-diagnosed osteoporosis (T ≤ −2.5) was the independent fracture risk factor. The effects of age, muscle strength, and Charlson Index on DEXA were found to be statistically significant. People old over 60, muscle strength test supine leg lift less than 20 times per minute, aCCI scores greater than or equal to 2, had lower DEXA T values (T ≤ −2.5). Discussion: This work was a single-center study, showed social economic status bias, and featured a limited number of cases. Therefore, multi-center studies are necessary in the future. Conclusions: This study revealed that FRAX should be improved further in combination with other risk factors, including aCCI, calcium intake, and muscle strength.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of Risk Factors for Primary Fracture in Elderly Patients with Osteoporosis AU - Xiao Li AU - Jun Wu AU - Xiang Li AU - Ka Li Frankie Leung AU - Tak Man Wong AU - Xinshuo Christian Fang Y1 - 2021/09/15 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18 DO - 10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18 T2 - American Journal of Health Research JF - American Journal of Health Research JO - American Journal of Health Research SP - 198 EP - 203 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-8796 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20210905.18 AB - Introduction: Osteoporosis is one of the major fundamental causes of fractures in individuals over 50 years old. Preventing the first fragility fracture is the most cost-effective strategy for addressing osteoporosis. Therefore, identifying individuals with a high risk of developing osteoporotic fractures is important to save limited medical resources. The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been used globally for assessing fracture risk. However, the accuracy of FRAX still needs to be improved partially because of the differences in race and socioeconomic status among nationalities. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of FRAX in Chinese people. The factors not involved in FRAX were also evaluated for a correlation with osteoporotic fracture risks. Results: Age, smoking status, alcohol intake, family history of osteoporotic fracture, diabetes mellitus type II, Charlson Index, vitamin D intake, calcium intake, muscle strength, modified Barthel Index, the 3-level version of EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire, and bone mineral density demonstrated significant differences between the fracture and control groups. Our results also demonstrated that dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-diagnosed osteoporosis (T ≤ −2.5) was the independent fracture risk factor. The effects of age, muscle strength, and Charlson Index on DEXA were found to be statistically significant. People old over 60, muscle strength test supine leg lift less than 20 times per minute, aCCI scores greater than or equal to 2, had lower DEXA T values (T ≤ −2.5). Discussion: This work was a single-center study, showed social economic status bias, and featured a limited number of cases. Therefore, multi-center studies are necessary in the future. Conclusions: This study revealed that FRAX should be improved further in combination with other risk factors, including aCCI, calcium intake, and muscle strength. VL - 9 IS - 5 ER -
Email: