Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical risk indices, prediction of osteoporosis, and prevention of fractures: diagnostic consequences and costs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Osteoporosis International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to validate the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tools for Asians (OSTA) instrument in Thai women, and to evaluate its utility in terms of economic costs and fracture prediction. Femoral neck and lumbar spine BMD was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in 322 Thai women, aged 60±10 years (mean±SD; range: 45–84 years). The women were classified as having osteoporosis if their BMD T -scores were ≤−2.5. The OSTA score was calculated for each woman using her age and weight according to the formula: 0.2(weight−age). Women with OSTA scores ≤−1 and >−1 were classified as “high risk” and “low risk,” respectively. The prevalence of osteoporosis was 33% by femoral neck or lumbar spine BMD. Using the OSTA score, 165 (51.2%) women were classified as high risk. The sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of OSTA was 82% 64% and 53%, respectively. If the OSTA score is used to identify women with high risk of fracture, and assuming that the incidence of fracture among osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic women are 2% and 1% per year, respectively, the OSTA score can identify 59% of fracture cases correctly, and 41% are expected to be missed. Furthermore, if the high-risk subjects identified by OSTA are to be treated, and if the treatment reduces fracture incidence by 50%, and assuming that the treatment cost is $1 per day, then the cost to prevent one fracture is estimated to be $48,530. Results of this study suggest that, in the Thai population, the OSTA score had high sensitivity but low specificity and low positive predictive value in the identification of osteoporotic women. Its use in the general population can result in a high false-positive rate and incur significant cost to the community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kanis JA (2002) Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk. Lancet 359:1929–1936

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lau EM, Lee JK, Suriwongpaisal P et al (2001) The incidence of hip fracture in four Asian countries: the Asian Osteoporosis Study (AOS). Osteoporos Int 12:239–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooper C, Campion G, Melton LJ (1992) Hip fractures in the elderly: A world-wide projection. Osteoporos Int 2:25–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Burger H, van Daele PL, Algra D et al (1994) The association between age and bone mineral density in men and women aged 55 years and over: the Rotterdam Study. Bone Miner 25:1–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fatayerji D, Cooper AM, Eastell R (1999) Total body and regional bone mineral density in men: effect of age. Osteoporos Int 10:59–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Edelstein SL, Barrett-Connor E (1993) Relation between body size and bone mineral density in elderly men and women. Am J Epidemiol 138:160–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ravn P, Cizza G, Bjarnason NH et al (1999) Low body mass index is an important risk factor for low bone mass and increased bone loss in early postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res14:1622–1627

    Google Scholar 

  8. Felson DT, Zhang Y, Hannan MT, Anderson JJ (1993) Effects of weight and body mass index on bone mineral density in men and women: the Framingham study. J Bone Miner Res 8:567–573

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Koh LK, Sedrine WB, Torralba TP et al (2001) A simple tool to identify Asian women at increased risk of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 12:699–705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reginster JY, Kung A, Koh L et al (2002) A simple chart for evaluating risk of osteoporosis in Asian women based on the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA). Osteoporos Int 13 [Suppl 3]:S30

  11. Cranney A, Wells G, Willan A et al (2002) Meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. II. Meta-analysis of alendronate for the treatment of postmenopausal women. Endocr Rev 23:508–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Park HM, Sedrine WB, Reginster JY, Ross PD (2003) Korean experience with the OSTA risk index for osteoporosis: a validation study. J Clin Densitom 6:247–250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cummings SR, Melton LJ (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359:1761–1767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fujiwara S, Masunari N, Suzuki G, Ross PD (2001) Performance of osteoporosis risk indices in a Japanese population. Curr Ther Res 62:586–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kung AW, Ho AY, Sedrine WB, Reginster JY, Ross PD (2003) Comparison of a simple clinical risk index and quantitative bone ultrasound for identifying women at increased risk of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 14:716–721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Siris ES, Miller PD, Barrett-Connor E et al (2001) Identification and fracture outcomes of undiagnosed low bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: results from the National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment. JAMA 286:2815–2822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nguyen TV, Center JR, Pocock NA, Eisman JA (2004) Limited utility of clinical risk indices in the identification of postmenopausal women with incident fractures. Osteoporos Int 15(1):49–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nguyen TV, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA (1997) Sources of variability in bone mineral density measurements: implications for study design and analysis of bone loss. J Bone Miner Res 12:124–135

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gnudi S, Malavolta N (2003) Comparison between T-score-based diagnosis of osteoporosis and specific skeletal site measurements: prognostic value for predicting fracture risk. J Clin Densitom 6:267–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The first author would like to acknowledge the Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University for its grant to the Garvan Institute of Medical Research

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuan V. Nguyen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pongchaiyakul, C., Nguyen, N.D., Eisman, J.A. et al. Clinical risk indices, prediction of osteoporosis, and prevention of fractures: diagnostic consequences and costs. Osteoporos Int 16, 1444–1450 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-005-1996-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-005-1996-z

Keywords

Navigation