The risk and burden of vertebral fractures in Sweden
- 607 Downloads
The aim of this study was to determine the risk and burden of vertebral fractures judged as those coming to clinical attention and as morphometric fractures. Incidence and utility loss were computed from data from Malmo, Sweden. Clinical fractures accounted for 23% of all vertebral deformities in women and for 42% in men. The average 10-year fracture probability for morphometric fractures increased with age in men from 2.9% at the age of 50 years (7.2% in women) to 8.4 at the age of 85 years (26.7% in women). As expected, probabilities increased with decreasing T-score for hip BMD. Cumulative utility loss from a clinical vertebral fracture was substantial and was 50–62% of that due to a hip fracture depending on age. When incidence of fractures in the population was weighted by disutility, all spine fractures accounted for more morbidity than hip fracture up to the age of 75 years. We conclude that vertebral fractures have a major personal and societal impact that needs to be recognised in algorithms for assessment of risk and in health economic strategies for osteoporosis.
KeywordsBurden of fracture Osteoporotic fracture Utility Vertebral fracture
We are grateful to the International Osteoporosis Foundation, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, the Alliance for Better Bone Health, Hologic, IGEA, Lilly, Lunar, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Wyeth for their unrestricted support of these studies.
- 7.Zethraeus N, Borgstrom F, Johnell O, Kanis JA, Jonsson B (2002) Costs and quality of life associated with osteoporosis-related fractures: results of a Swedish Survey. Working paper series in economics and finance. Report 512. School of Health Economics, StockholmGoogle Scholar
- 9.Johnell O, Kanis JA, De Laet C, Jonsson B, Zethraeus N, Oden A (2002) Sequential changes in quality of life after osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 13 [Suppl 1]:S70Google Scholar
- 17.World Health Organisation (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. WHO Technical Report Series 843. WHO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 20.De Laet CEDH, Van Hout BA, Burger H, Hofman A, Pols HAP (1997) Bone density and risk of hip fracture in men and women: cross sectional analysis. Br Med J 315:221–225Google Scholar
- 22.Wasnich RD, Ross PD, Heilbrun LK, Vogel JM (1985) Prediction of postmenopausal fracture risk with use of bone mineral measurements. Am J Obst Gynaec 153:745–751Google Scholar
- 23.Marshall D, Johnell O, Weder H (1996) Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporosis fractures. Br Med J 312:1254–1259Google Scholar
- 24.Lundberg L, Johannesson M, Isacson DGL, Borgquist L (1999) Health-state utilities in a general population in relation to age, gender and socio-economic factors. Europ J Public Health 9 211–217Google Scholar
- 25.Oleksik A, Lips P, Dawson A, et al (2000) Health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with low BMD with or without prevalent vertebral fracture. J Bone Min Res 15:1384–1392Google Scholar
- 26.National Osteoporosis Foundation (1998) Osteoporosis: review of the evidence for prevention, diagnosis and treatment and cost-effectiveness analysis. Status report. Osteoporos Int 8:1–88Google Scholar
- 27.Jonsson B, Christiansen C, Johnell O, Hedbrandt J, Karlsson R (1996) Cost effectiveness of fracture prevention in established osteoporosis. Scand J Rheumatol [Suppl] 103:30–38Google Scholar
- 31.Kanis JA, Brazier J, Stevenson M, Calvert N, Lloyd-Jones M (2002) Treatment of established osteoporosis. A systematic review and cost-utility analysis. Health Technol Assess 6:29Google Scholar