Associations between adverse social position and bone mineral density in women aged 50 years or older: data from the Manitoba Bone Density Program
- 298 Downloads
We examined the independent contribution of income to low bone mineral density in women aged 50 years and older. A significant dose–response association was observed between low income and low (bone mineral density) BMD, which was not explained by clinical risk factors or osteoporotic treatment in the year prior.
The association between social disadvantage and osteoporosis is attracting increased attention; however, little is known of the role played by income. We examined associations between income and bone mineral density (BMD) in 51,327 women aged ≥50 years from Manitoba, Canada.
Low BMD was defined as a T-score ≥2.5SD (femoral neck or minimum) measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) 1996–2001. Mean household income was extracted from Canada Census 2006 public use files and categorized into quintiles. Age, weight and height were recorded at time of DXA. Parental hip fracture was self-reported. Diagnosed comorbidities, including osteoporotic fracture and rheumatoid arthritis, were ascertained from hospital records and physician billing claims. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was used as a proxy for smoking and alcohol abuse as a proxy for high alcohol intake. Corticosteroid use was obtained from the comprehensive provincial pharmacy system. Logistic regression was used to assess relationships between income (highest income quintile held as referent) and BMD, accounting for clinical risk factors.
Compared to quintile 5, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for low BMD at femoral neck for quintiles 1 through 4 were, respectively, OR1.41 (95 %CI 1.29–1.55), OR1.32 (95 %CI 1.20–1.45), OR1.19 (95 %CI 1.08–1.30) and OR1.10 (95 %CI 1.00–1.21). Similar associations were observed when further adjustment was made for osteoporotic drug treatment 12 months prior and when low BMD was defined by minimum T-score.
Lower income was associated with lower BMD, independent of clinical risk factors. Further work should examine whether lower income increases the likelihood of treatment qualification.
KeywordsBone mineral density Disadvantage Income Osteoporosis Social determinants
- 1.Wilkinson RG, Marmot MG (eds) (1998) Social determinants of health: the solid facts. WHO European Region, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
- 2.Wilkinson R, Pickett K (2009) The spirit level: why more equal societies almost always do better. Allen Lane, London, UKGoogle Scholar
- 19.Brennan SL, Pasco JA, Urquhart DM, Oldenburg B, Hanna FS, Wluka AE (2009) The association between socioeconomic status and osteoporotic fracture in population-based adults: a systematic review. Osteoporos Int 49:165–171Google Scholar
- 24.(Accessed July 2011) www.gov.mb.ca/health/programs/mbd. In Government of Manitoba. Manitoba, Canada
- 28.Leslie WD, Derksen SA, Metge C, Lix LM, Salamon EA, Steiman PW, Roos LL (2005) Demographic risk factors for fracture in First Nations people. Canadian J Public Health Revue Canadienne de Sante Publique 96(Suppl 1):S45–S50Google Scholar
- 30.Starfield B, Weiner J, Mumford L et al (1991) Ambulatory care groups: a categorization of diagnoses for research and management. Heal Serv Res 26:53–74Google Scholar
- 40.Alver K, Sogaard AJ, Falch JA, Meyer HE (2007) The Oslo Health Study: is bone mineral density higher in affluent areas? Int J Equity in Health 6. doi:10.1186/1475-9276-1186-1119
- 43.Keleher H, MacDougall C, Murphy B (eds) (2008) Understanding health promotion. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar