Cost-effectiveness of bone densitometry among Caucasian women and men without a prior fracture according to age and body weight
- First Online:
- 513 Downloads
We used a microsimulation model to estimate the threshold body weights at which screening bone densitometry is cost-effective. Among women aged 55–65 years and men aged 55–75 years without a prior fracture, body weight can be used to identify those for whom bone densitometry is cost-effective.
Bone densitometry may be more cost-effective for those with lower body weight since the prevalence of osteoporosis is higher for those with low body weight. Our purpose was to estimate weight thresholds below which bone densitometry is cost-effective for women and men without a prior clinical fracture at ages 55, 60, 65, 75, and 80 years.
We used a microsimulation model to estimate the costs and health benefits of bone densitometry and 5 years of fracture prevention therapy for those without prior fracture but with femoral neck osteoporosis (T-score ≤ −2.5) and a 10-year hip fracture risk of ≥3%. Threshold pre-test probabilities of low BMD warranting drug therapy at which bone densitometry is cost-effective were calculated. Corresponding body weight thresholds were estimated using data from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF), the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) study, and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for 2005–2006.
Assuming a willingness to pay of $75,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) and drug cost of $500/year, body weight thresholds below which bone densitometry is cost-effective for those without a prior fracture were 74, 90, and 100 kg, respectively, for women aged 55, 65, and 80 years; and were 67, 101, and 108 kg, respectively, for men aged 55, 75, and 80 years.
For women aged 55–65 years and men aged 55–75 years without a prior fracture, body weight can be used to select those for whom bone densitometry is cost-effective.
KeywordsBody weight Bone densitometry Cost-effectiveness Osteoporosis screening
- 2.National Osteoporosis Foundation (2008) Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 13.Schousboe JT, Ensrud KE, Nyman JA, Kane RL, Melton LJ 3rd (2006) Cost-effectiveness of vertebral fracture assessment to detect prevalent vertebral deformity and select postmenopausal women with a femoral neck T-score > −2.5 for alendronate therapy: a modeling study. J Clin Densitom 9:133–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Dawson-Hughes B, Lindsay R, Khosla S, Melton I, LR, Tosteson A, Favus M, Baim S (2008) Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation. http://www.nof.org/professionals/NOF_Clinicians_Guide.pdf Accessed May 11, 2008 2008
- 17.WHO Coordinating Center for Metabolic Bone Diseases (2010) FRAX WHO Fracture Risk Assessment Tool. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, U.K. http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/FRAX/tool.jsp?country=9 Accessed March 1 2011
- 19.World Health Organization (2001) Macroeconomics and health: investing in health for economic development. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 24.Arias E (2007) United States life tables, 2003. National Vital Statistics Report 54:1–40Google Scholar
- 26.Ettinger B, Black DM, Dawson-Hughes B, Pressman AR, Melton LJ, 3 rd Updated fracture incidence rates for the US version of FRAX. Osteoporos Int 21:25-33Google Scholar
- 36.Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2007) Physician fee schedule search 2007. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PFSlookup/02_PFSSearch.asp Accessed March 4, 2007 2007
- 37.Centers for Disease Control (2005–2006) National Health and Nutrition Survery. May 21, 2009 edn.Google Scholar
- 38.(2001) Drug topics 2001 red book. Medical Economics, MontvaleGoogle Scholar
- 49.U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2011) Screening for osteoporosis: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 154:356–364Google Scholar
- 53.Nielson C, Srikanth P, Orwoll E (2012) Obesity and fracture in men and women: an epidemiologic perspective. Journal of Bone and Mineral ResearchGoogle Scholar
- 60.Brown LP, Cai TT, Das Gupta A (2001) Interval estimation for a binomial proportion. Stat Sci 16:101–117Google Scholar