Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Which screening strategy using BMD measurements would be most cost effective for hip fracture prevention in elderly women? A decision analysis based on a Markov model

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

Abstract

Introduction

Hip fractures are responsible for excessive mortality, decreasing the 5-year survival rate by about 20%. From an economic perspective, they represent a major source of expense, with direct costs in hospitalization, rehabilitation, and institutionalization. The incidence rate sharply increases after the age of 70, but it can be reduced in women aged 70–80 years by therapeutic interventions. Recent analyses suggest that the most efficient strategy is to implement such interventions in women at the age of 70 years. As several guidelines recommend bone mineral density (BMD) screening of postmenopausal women with clinical risk factors, our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of two screening strategies applied to elderly women aged 70 years and older.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using decision-tree analysis and a Markov model. Two alternative strategies, one measuring BMD of all women, and one measuring BMD only of those having at least one risk factor, were compared with the reference strategy “no screening”. Cost-effectiveness ratios were measured as cost per year gained without hip fracture. Most probabilities were based on data observed in EPIDOS, SEMOF and OFELY cohorts.

Results

In this model, which is mostly based on observed data, the strategy “screen all” was more cost effective than “screen women at risk.” For one woman screened at the age of 70 and followed for 10 years, the incremental (additional) cost-effectiveness ratio of these two strategies compared with the reference was 4,235 euros and 8,290 euros, respectively.

Conclusion

The results of this model, under the assumptions described in the paper, suggest that in women aged 70–80 years, screening all women with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) would be more effective than no screening or screening only women with at least one risk factor. Cost-effectiveness studies based on decision-analysis trees maybe useful tools for helping decision makers, and further models based on different assumptions should be performed to improve the level of evidence on cost-effectiveness ratios of the usual screening strategies for osteoporosis.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. WHO (1994) World Health Organization, Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. In. WHO, Geneva

  2. Melton LJI, Atkinson EJ, O’Fallon WM, Wahner HW, Riggs BL (1993) Long-term fracture prediction by bone mineral assessed at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res 8:1227–1233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Marshall D, Johnell O, Wedel H (1996) Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures. BMJ 312:1254–1259

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Schott AM, Cormier C, Hans D, Favier F, Hausherr E, Dargent-Molina P, Delmas PD, Ribot C, Sebert JL, Breart G, Meunier PJ (1998) How hip and whole-body bone mineral density predict hip fracture in elderly women: the EPIDOS Prospective Study. Osteoporos Int 8:247–254

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cummings SR, Black DM, Nevitt MC, Browner W, Cauley J, Ensrud K, Genant HK, Palermo L, Scott J, Vogt TM (1993) Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Lancet 341:72–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Robbins JA, Schott AM, Garnero P, Delmas PD, Hans D, Meunier PJ (2004) Risk factors for hip fracture in women with high BMD: EPIDOS study. Osteoporos Int 8:8

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schott AM, Kassai Koupai B, Hans D, Dargent-Molina P, Ecochard R, Bauer DC, Breart G, Meunier PJ (2004) Should age influence the choice of quantitative bone assessment technique in elderly women? The EPIDOS study. Osteoporos Int 15:196–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. European-Commission (1998) Report on osteoporosis in the European Community. In: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

  9. Kanis JA (1997) Diagnosis of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 7:S108–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kanis JA, Black D, Cooper C, Dargent P, Dawson-Hughes B, De Laet C, Delmas P, Eisman J, Johnell O, Jonsson B, Melton L, Oden A, Papapoulos S, Pols H, Rizzoli R, Silman A, Tenenhouse A (2002) A new approach to the development of assessment guidelines for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 13:527–536

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chapuy MC, Meunier PJ (1998) Pathophysiology and prevention of hip fractures in elderly people. In: Meunier PJ (ed) Osteoporosis: diagnosis and management. Martin Dunitz Ltd, London, pp 191–209

    Google Scholar 

  12. Meyer HE, Tverdal A, Falch JA, Pedersen JI (2000) Factors associated with mortality after hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 11:228–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Arden N, Cooper C (1998) Present and future of osteoporosis: epidemiology. In: Meunier PJ (ed) Osteoporosis: diagnosis and management. Martin Dunitz Ltd, London, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jensen JS, Bagger J (1982) Long-term social prognosis after hip fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 53:97–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. McClung MR, Geusens P, Miller PD, Zippel H, Bensen WG, Roux C, Adami S, Fogelman I, Diamond T, Eastell R, Meunier PJ, Reginster JY (2001) Effect of risedronate on the risk of hip fracture in elderly women. Hip Intervention Program Study Group. N Engl J Med 344:333–340

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Black DM, Cummings SR, Karpf DB, Cauley JA, Thompson DE, Nevitt MC, Bauer DC, Genant HK, Haskell WL, Marcus R, Ott SM, Torner JC, Quandt SA, Reiss TF, Ensrud KE (1996) Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group. Lancet 348:1535–1541

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chapuy MC, Arlot ME, Delmas PD, Meunier PJ, Duboeuf F, Brun J, Crouzet B, Arnaud S (1994) Effect of calcium and cholecalciferol treatment for three years on hip fractures in elderly women. BMJ 308:1081–1082

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Caulin F, Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A (2002) Optimal age for preventing osteoporosis after menopause depends on effects of stopping treatment. Bone 30:754–758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kanis JA, Torgerson D, Cooper C (2000) Comparison of the European and USA practice guidelines for Osteoporosis. Trends Endocrinol Metab 11:28–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Weinstein MC, Stason WB (1977) Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 296:716–721

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL et al (1997) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. In Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tosteson AN, Gabriel SE, Grove MR, Moncur MM, Kneeland TS, Melton LJ 3rd (2001) Impact of hip and vertebral fractures on quality-adjusted life years. Osteoporos Int 12:1042–1049

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR (1993) Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 13:322–338

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kanis JA, Borgstrom F, Johnell O, Jonsson B (2004) Cost-effectiveness of risedronate for the treatment of osteoporosis and prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 3:3

    Google Scholar 

  25. Baudoin C (1997) [Fractures of the proximal femur. Epidemiology and economic impact]. Presse Med 26:1451–1456

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Baudoin C, Fardellone P, Bean K, Ostertag-Ezembe A, Hervy F (1996) Clinical outcomes and mortality after hip fracture: a 2-year follow-up study. Bone 18:149S–157S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Baudoin C, Fardellone P, Potard V, Sebert JL (1993) Fractures of the proximal femur in Picardy, France, in 1987. Osteoporos Int 3:43–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jonsson B, Kanis J, Dawson A, Oden A, Johnell O (1999) Effect and offset of effect of treatments for hip fracture on health outcomes. Osteoporos Int 10:193–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kanis JA, Dawson A, Oden A, Johnell O, de Laet C, Jonsson B (2001) Cost-effectiveness of preventing hip fracture in the general female population. Osteoporos Int 12:356–361

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, De Laet C, Oglesby A, Jonsson B (2002) Intervention thresholds for osteoporosis. Bone 31:26–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, De Laet C, Jonsson B, Dawson A (2002) Ten-year risk of osteoporotic fracture and the effect of risk factors on screening strategies. Bone 30:251–258

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, Dawson A, De Laet C, Jonsson B (2001) Ten year probabilities of osteoporotic fractures according to BMD and diagnostic thresholds. Osteoporos Int 12:989–995

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Watt S (2003) [The cost of screening for breast and cervical cancer in France]. Bull Cancer 90:997–1004

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kanis JA, Jonsson B (2002) Economic evaluation of interventions for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 13:765–767

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Maurel FLE, Le Pen C (1998) Le coût hospitalier des fractures ostéoporotiques en France. Journal d’Economie Médicale T.16:99–108

    Google Scholar 

  36. Treves R, Arnaud M, Bertin P, Desproges-Gotteron R, Arnaud JP, Pecout D, Dunoyer J (1989) [Evaluation of the hospital cost of femoral neck fractures]. Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic 56:569

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Levy E (1989) Cost analysis of osteoporosis related to untreated menopause. Clin Rheumatol 8:76–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sox HC, Blatt MA, Higgins MC, Marton KI (1988) Medical decision making. Boston

  39. Zethraeus N, Johannesson M, Jonsson B, Lothgren M, Tambour M (2003) Advantages of using the net-benefit approach for analysing uncertainty in economic evaluation studies. Pharmacoeconomics 21:39–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lilliu H, Pamphile R, Chapuy MC, Schulten J, Arlot M, Meunier PJ (2003) Calcium-vitamin D3 supplementation is cost-effective in hip fractures prevention. Maturitas 44:299–305

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Schousboe JT, Ensrud KE, Nyman JA, Melton LJ 3rd, Kane RL (2005) Universal bone densitometry screening combined with alendronate therapy for those diagnosed with osteoporosis is highly cost-effective for elderly women. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:1697–1704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lips P, van Schoor NM, Melton LJ 3rd, Atkinson EJ, Khosla S, Oberg AL, Riggs BL (2005) Quality of life in patients with osteoporosis evaluation of a prediction model for long-term fracture risk. Osteoporos Int 16:447–455 Epub 2004 Dec 2018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gabriel SE, Kneeland TS, Melton LJ 3rd, Moncur MM, Ettinger B, Tosteson AN (1999) Health-related quality of life in economic evaluations for osteoporosis: whose values should we use? Med Decis Making 19:141–148

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Abrahamsen B, Stilgren LS, Hermann AP, Tofteng CL, Barenholdt O, Vestergaard P, Brot C, Nielsen SP (2001) Discordance between changes in bone mineral density measured at different skeletal sites in perimenopausal women--implications for assessment of bone loss and response to therapy: The Danish Osteoporosis Prevention Study. J Bone Miner Res 16:1212–1219

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Nevitt MC, Johnell O, Black DM, Ensrud K, Genant HK, Cummings SR (1994) Bone mineral density predicts non-spine fractures in very elderly women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Osteoporos Int 4:325–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Chapuy MC, Arlot ME, Duboeuf F, Brun J, Crouzet B, Arnaud S, Delmas PD, Meunier PJ (1992) Vitamin D3 and calcium to prevent hip fractures in the elderly women. N Engl J Med 3271:637–642

    Google Scholar 

  47. Meunier PJ, Delmas PD, Eastell R, McClung MR, Papapoulos S, Rizzoli R, Seeman E, Wasnich RD (1999) Diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: clinical guidelines. International Committee for Osteoporosis Clinical Guidelines. Clin Ther 21:1025–1044

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Pols HA, Felsenberg D, Hanley DA, Stepan J, Munoz-Torres M, Wilkin TJ, Qin-sheng G, Galich AM, Vandormael K, Yates AJ, Stych B (1999) Multinational, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of the effects of alendronate on bone density and fracture risk in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: results of the FOSIT study. Fosamax International Trial Study Group. Osteoporos Int 9:461–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Kreiger N, McIsaac WJ, Darlington GA, Tu JV (2000) Development and validation of the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. CMAJ 162:1289–1294

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Murray TM, McIsaac WJ, Joseph L, Brown JP (2001) Evaluation of decision rules for referring women for bone densitometry by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. JAMA 286:57–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Ungar WJ, Josse R, Lee S, Ryan N, Adachi R, Hanley D, Brown J, Breton MC (2000) The Canadian SCORE questionnaire: optimizing the use of technology for low bone density assessment. Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimate. J Clin Densitom 3:269–280

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Goemaere S, Zegels B, Toye K, Cremer S, Demuynck R, Daems M, Dobbelaere K, Sedrine WB, Albert A, Dewe W, Kaufman JM, Reginster JY (1999) Limited clinical utility of a self-evaluating risk assessment scale for postmenopausal osteoporosis: lack of predictive value of lifestyle-related factors. Calcif Tissue Int 65:354–358

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. van der Voort DJ, Brandon S, Dinant GJ, van Wersch JW (2000) Screening for osteoporosis using easily obtainable biometrical data: diagnostic accuracy of measured, self-reported and recalled BMI, and related costs of bone mineral density measurements. Osteoporos Int 11:233–239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ben Sedrine W, Devogelaer JP, Kaufman JM, Goemaere S, Depresseux G, Zegels B, Deroisy R, Reginster JY (2001) Evaluation of the simple calculated osteoporosis risk estimation (SCORE) in a sample of white women from Belgium. Bone 29:374–380

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Amamra N, Berr C, Clavel-Chapelon F, Delcourt C, Delmas P, Derriennic F, Ducimetiere P, Goldberg M, Letenneur L, Rabilloud M, Meunier PJ, Schott AM (2004) Estimated number of women likely to benefit from bone mineral density measurements in France. Joint Bone Spine 75(5):409–418

    Google Scholar 

  56. Melton LJ 3rd, Atkinson EJ, Khosla S, Oberg AL, Riggs BL (2005) Evaluation of a prediction model for long-term fracture risk. J Bone Miner Res 20:551–556 Epub 2004 Dec 2006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Epidemiology Unit, Département d’Information Médicale des Hospices Civils de Lyon, 162 avenue Lacassagne, 69424, Lyon Cedex 03, France

    A. M. Schott & C. Colin

  2. INSERM U 403, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, 5 place d’Arsonval, 69437, Lyon Cedex 03, France

    A. M. Schott, P. D. Delmas & P. J. Meunier

  3. Medico-economic evaluation Unit, Département d’Information Médicale des Hospices Civils de Lyon, 162 avenue Lacassagne, 69424, Lyon Cedex 03, France

    C. Ganne, G. Monnier, R. Gauchoux & C. Colin

  4. Nuclear Medicine Division, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland

    D. Hans

  5. CHU Vaudois, Lauzanne University Hospital, Lauzanne, Switzerland

    M. A. Krieg

Authors
  1. A. M. Schott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Ganne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Hans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. Monnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. Gauchoux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. A. Krieg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. P. D. Delmas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. P. J. Meunier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. C. Colin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. M. Schott.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schott, A.M., Ganne, C., Hans, D. et al. Which screening strategy using BMD measurements would be most cost effective for hip fracture prevention in elderly women? A decision analysis based on a Markov model. Osteoporos Int 18, 143–151 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0227-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0227-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation