Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Urban-rural differences in distal forearm fractures: Cohort Norway

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

Abstract

Summary

The prevalence of forearm fractures increased with increasing degree of urbanization for both genders in the population-based study “Cohort Norway” with more than 180,000 participants. The differences were not explained by available risk factors. Prospective studies with information on bone mineral density and falls are warranted.

Introduction

The purpose was to investigate urban-rural gradients in self-reported forearm fractures and assess the contribution of possible explanatory factors.

Methods

“Cohort Norway” comprises ten population-based surveys inviting 309,742 individuals age 20 years and older. All 181,891 participants underwent a standardized examination and answered 50 common questions, including one concerning former forearm fractures. Based on the home-addresses, participants were divided into three population density groups: cities, densely populated areas and sparsely populated areas. Analyses were limited to 149,725 participants 30 years or over with valid information on exposure and outcome. Of these, 21,627 reported having suffered a forearm fracture.

Results

The prevalence of forearm fractures increased with increasing degree of urbanization for both genders. After adjustment for age and explanatory factors, the odds ratio of having sustained a forearm fracture in men living in densely populated areas and in cities were 1.12 (95% CI, 1.04–1.21) and 1.38 (95% CI, 1.30–1.46), respectively, compared to rural areas. Similar odds ratios were observed among women.

Conclusions

Prospective studies are needed to verify whether lower bone mineral density, different lifestyle and/or more falls may explain the higher proportion of self-reported forearm fractures found in urban compared to rural areas.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CONOR:

the collaborative Norwegian study “Cohort Norway”

BMD:

bone mineral density

BMI:

body mass index

SD:

standard deviation

OR:

odds ratio

CI:

confidence interval

References

  1. Falch JA (1983) Epidemiology of fractures of the distal forearm in Oslo, Norway. Acta Orthop Scand 54:291–295

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hove LM, Fjeldsgaard K, Reitan R et al (1995) Fractures of the distal radius in a Norwegian city. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 29:263–267

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. O’Neill TW, Cooper C, Finn JD et al (2001) Incidence of distal forearm fracture in British men and women. Osteoporos Int 12:555–558

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Earnshaw SA, Caute SA, Worley A et al (1998) Colles’ fracture of the wrist as an indicator of underlying osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: a prospective study of bone mineral density and bone turnover rate. Osteoporos Int 8:53–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Haugeberg G, Gjesdal CG, Gulseth HC (2005) Application of the Norwegian medicines agency osteoporosis treatment guidelines on male and female patients with wrist fractures in Norway [Abstract]. J Bone Miner Res 20(Suppl 1):S266

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cuddihy MT, Gabriel SE, Crowson CS et al (1999) Forearm fractures as predictors of subsequent osteoporotic fracture. Osteoporos Int 9:469–475

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman PB (2000) Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: A summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. J Bone Miner Res 15:721–739

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schousboe JT, Fink HA, Taylor BC et al (2005) Association between self-reported prior wrist fractures and risk of subsequent hip and radiographic vertebral fractures in older women: a prospective study. J Bone Miner Res 20:100–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Finsen V, Benum P (1987) Changing incidence of hip fractures in rural and urban areas of central Norway. Clin Orthop Relat Res 218:104–110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Finsen V, Johnsen LG, Tranø G et al (2004) Hip fracture incidence in Central Norway: a follow-up study. Clin Orthop 419:173–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Larsson S, Eliasson P, Hansson LI (1989) Hip fractures in northern Sweden 1973–1984. Acta Orthop Scand 60:567–571

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Falch JA, Ilebekk A, Slungaard U (1985) Epidemiology of hip fractures in Norway. Acta Orthop Scand 56:12–16

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Madhok R, Melton LJ III, Atkinson E et al (1993) Urban vs rural increase in hip fracture incidence. Acta Orthop Scand 64:543–548

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sanders KM, Nicholson GC, Ugoni AM et al (2002) Fracture rates lower in rural than urban communities: the geelong osteoporosis study. J Epidemiol Community Health 56:466–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Falch JA, Kaastad TS, Bohler G et al (1993) Secular increase and geographical differences in hip fracture incidence in Norway. Bone 14:643–645

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mannius S, Mellstrom D, Oden A et al (1987) Incidence of hip fracture in western Sweden 1974–1982. Comparison of rural and urban populations. Acta Orthop Scand 58:38–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sernbo I, Johnell O, Andersson T (1988) Differences in the incidence of hip fracture. Comparison of an urban and a rural population in southern Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 59:382–385

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chevalley T, Herrmann FR, Delmi M et al (2002) Evaluation of the age-adjusted incidence of hip fractures between urban and rural areas: the difference is not related to the prevalence of institutions for the elderly. Osteoporos Int 13:113–118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cooley HM, Jones G (2002) Symptomatic fracture incidence in southern Tasmania: does living in the country reduce your fracture risk? Osteoporos Int 13:317–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Jonsson B, Gardsell P, Johnell O et al (1992) Differences in fracture pattern between an urban and a rural population: a comparative population-based study in southern Sweden. Osteoporos Int 2:269–273

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Melton LJ 3rd, Crowson CS, O’Fallon WN (1999) Fracture incidence in Olmsted County, Minnesota: comparison of urban with rural rates and changes in urban rates over time. Osteoporos Int 9:29–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Engeland A, Søgaard AJ (2003) CONOR (Cohort NORway)-an overview of a unique research material [In Norwegian-English abstract]. Nor J Epidemiol 13:73–77, Available from: http://www.medisin.ntnu.no/ism/nofe/norepid/2003(1)%2011-Engeland.pdf

  23. CONOR (2006) Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. Available at: http://www.fhi.no/artikler/?id=28138. Accessed October 30

  24. Søgaard AJ, Selmer R, Bjertness E et al (2004) The oslo health study. The impact of self-selection in a large, population-based survey. Int J Equity Health [serial online] May 6;3:3. Available from: BioMed Central Ltd. Online: http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/3/1/3

  25. Joakimsen RM, Fonnebø V, Søgaard AJ et al (2001) The Tromsø Study: registration of fractures, how good are self-reports, a computerized radiographic register and a discharge register? Osteoporos Int 12:1001–1005

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ivers RQ, Cumming RG, Mitchell P et al (2002) The accuracy of self-reported fractures in older people. J Clin Epidemiol 55:452–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hundrup YA, Hoidrup S, Obel EB et al (2004) The validity of self-reported fractures among Danish female nurses: comparison with fractures registered in the Danish National Hospital Register. Scand J Public Health 32:136–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Chen Z, Kooperberg C, Pettinger MB et al (2004) Validity of self-report for fractures among a multiethnic cohort of postmenopausal women: results from the Women’s Health Initiative observational study and clinical trials. Menopause 11:264–274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nevitt MC, Cummings SR, Browner WS et al (1992) The accuracy of self-report of fractures in elderly women: evidence from a prospective study. Am J Epidemiol 135:490–499

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ismail AA, O’Neill TW, Cockerill W et al (2000) Validity of self-report of fractures: results from a prospective study in men and women across Europe. EPOS Study Group. European prospective osteoporosis study group. Osteoporos Int 11:248–254

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Jonsson B, Gardsell P, Johnell O et al (1994) Remembering fractures: fracture registration and proband recall in southern Sweden. J Epidemiol Community Health 48:489–490

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Barrett-Connor E, Siris E, Wehren LE et al (2005) Osteoporosis and fracture risk in women of different ethnic groups. J Bone Miner Res 20:185–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wigg AE, Hearn TC, McCaul KA et al (2003) Number, incidence, and projections of distal forearm fractures admitted to hospital in Australia. J Trauma 55:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sanders KM, Pasco JA, Ugoni AM et al (1998) The exclusion of high trauma fractures may underestimate the prevalence of bone fragility fractures in the community: the geelong osteoporosis study. J Bone Mineral Res 13:1337–1342

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Alver K, Meyer HE, Falch JA et al (2006) Air pollution and bone mineral density in elderly men. Abstract. National Osteoporosis Society 11th Conference on Osteoporosis, Harrogate, United Kingdom, June 25–28

  36. Thompson PW, Taylor J, Dawson A (2004) The annual incidence and seasonal variation of fractures of the distal radius in men and women over 25 years in Dorset, UK. Injuy 35:462–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Meyer HE, Berntsen GKR, Søgaard AJ et al (2004) Higher bone mineral density in rural compared with urban dwellers: the NOREPOS study. Am J Epidemiol 160:1039–1046

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Gardsell P, Johnell O, Nilsson BE et al (1991) Bone mass in an urban and a rural population: a comparative, population-based study in southern Sweden. J Bone Miner Res 6:67–75, Erratum in: J Bone Miner Res 1991;6:428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Pongchaiyakul C, Nguyen T, Kosulwat V et al (2005) Effect of urbanization on bone mineral density: a Thai epidemiological study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord [serial online]. Feb 4;6:5. Available from: BioMed Central Ltd. Online: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/6/5

  40. Jonsson B, Gardsell P, Johnell O et al (1993) Life-style and different fracture prevalence: a cross-sectional comparative population-based study. Calsif Tissue Int 52:425–433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ringsberg K, Gardsell P, Johnell O et al (2001) The impact of long-term moderate physical activity on functional performance, bone mineral density and fracture incidence in elderly women. Gerontology 47:15–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. European Prospective Osteoporosis Study Group (2003) Risk factors for Colles’ fracture in men and women: results from the European prospective osteoporosis study. Osteoporos Int 14:213–218

    Google Scholar 

  43. Thorpe DL, Knutsen SF, Beeson WL, Fraser GE (2006) The effect of vigorous physical activity and risk of wrist fracture over 25 years in a low-risk survivor cohort. J Bone Miner Metab 24:476–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

All data used in this paper were obtained from Cohort Norway. The authors gratefully acknowledge the services of CONOR and the contributing research centers delivering data to CONOR. Our sincere thank you goes to all participants as well as to staff-members dealing with data collection in the health surveys contributing to the CONOR database.

We would like to thank Luai Awad Ahmed, PhD, Institute of Community Medicine, University of Tromsø, Norway for his preliminary analyses of forearm fractures from the Fracture Registry at the University Hospital in Tromsø.

Funding

The CONOR collaborative group has received financial support from the Ministry of Social Affairs. The NOREPOS research group has received financial support from the Research Council of Norwegian and the Norwegian Osteoporosis Society.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, P.O. Box 4404, 0403, Oslo, Norway

    A. J. Søgaard, T. K. Gustad & H. E. Meyer

  2. Institute of General Practice and Community Medicine, Section for Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    A. J. Søgaard, T. K. Gustad, E. Bjertness & H. E. Meyer

  3. Departement of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    G. S. Tell

  4. Departement of Community Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    B. Schei

  5. Institute of Community Medicine, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway

    N. Emaus

Authors
  1. A. J. Søgaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. K. Gustad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Bjertness
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. S. Tell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. B. Schei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. N. Emaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. H. E. Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

On behalf of the Norwegian Epidemiological Osteoporosis Studies (NOREPOS) Research Group

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. J. Søgaard.

Additional information

The NOREPOS Research GroupThe Core Research Group (in alphabetic order): Nina Emaus (Tromsø), Haakon E. Meyer (Oslo), Berit Schei (Nord-Trøndelag), and Grethe S. Tell (Bergen). Local collaborators (in alphabetic order): Bergen: Gjesdal CG, Tell GS Nord-Trøndelag: Forsén L, Forsmo S, Langhammer A, Schei B Oslo: Falch JA, Meyer HE, Søgaard AJ Tromsø: Berntsen GKR, Emaus N, Fønnebø V, Joachimsen RM

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Søgaard, A.J., Gustad, T.K., Bjertness, E. et al. Urban-rural differences in distal forearm fractures: Cohort Norway. Osteoporos Int 18, 1063–1072 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-007-0353-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-007-0353-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation