Abstract
Summary
Absolute risk assessment is now the preferred approach to guide osteoporosis treatment decisions. Data collected passively during routine healthcare operations can be used to develop discriminative absolute risk assessment rules in male veterans. These rules could be used to develop computerized clinical decision support tools that might improve fracture prevention.
Introduction
Absolute risk assessment is the preferred approach to guiding treatment decisions in osteoporosis. Current recommended risk stratification rules perform poorly in men, among whom osteoporosis is overlooked and undertreated. A potential solution lies in clinical decision support technology. The objective of this study was to determine whether data passively collected in routine healthcare operations could identify male veterans at highest risk with acceptable discrimination.
Methods
Using administrative and clinical databases for male veterans ≥50 years old who sought care in 2005–2006, we created risk stratification rules for hip and any major fracture. We identified variables related to known or theoretical risk factors and created prognostic models using Cox regression. We validated the rules and estimated optimism. We created risk scores from hazards ratios and used them to predict fractures with logistic regression.
Results
The predictive models had C-statistics of 0.81 for hip and 0.74 for any major fracture, suggesting good to acceptable discrimination. For hip fracture, the cut-point that maximized percentage classified correctly (accuracy) predicted 165 of 227 hip fractures (73%) and missed 62 (27%). All hip fractures in patients with prior fracture were identified and 67% in patients without. For any major fracture, the maximal-accuracy cut-point predicted 611 of 987 (62%) and missed 376 (38%); the rule predicted all 134 fractures in patients with prior fracture and 56% in patients without.
Conclusion
Data collected passively in routine healthcare operations can identify male veterans at highest risk for fracture with discrimination that exceeds that reported for other methods applied in men.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Osteoporosis Foundation. Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. 2008. Available online at http://www.nof.org/professionals/Clinicians_Guide.htm. Accessed 27 March 2009
Sandhu SK, Nguyen ND, Center JR, Pocock NA, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2009) Prognosis of fracture: evaluation of predictive accuracy of the FRAX algorithm and Garvan nomogram. Osteoporos Int 21(5):863–871
Robbins J, Aragaki AK, Kooperberg C, Watts N, Wactawski-Wende J, Jackson RD, LeBoff MS, Lewis CE, Chen Z, Stefanick ML, Cauley J (2007) Factors associated with 5-year risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal women. JAMA 298:2389–2398
Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2008) Development of prognostic nomograms for individualizing 5-year and 10-year fracture risks. Osteoporos Int 19:1431–1444
Morris CA, Cabral D, Cheng H, Katz JN, Finkelstein JS, Avorn J, Solomon DH (2004) Patterns of bone mineral density testing: current guidelines, testing rates, and interventions. J Gen Intern Med 19:783–790
National Committee for Quality Assurance (2009) The state of healthcare quality: Value, variation, and vulnerable populations. Available online at http://www.ncqa.org/Portals/0/Newsroom/SOHC/SOHC_2009.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2010
Simonelli C, Killeen K, Mehle S, Swanson L (2002) Barriers to osteoporosis identification and treatment among primary care physicians and orthopedic surgeons. Mayo Clin Proc 77:334–338
Feldstein A, Elmer PJ, Smith DH, Herson M, Orwoll E, Chen C, Aickin M, Swain MC (2006) Electronic medical record reminder improves osteoporosis management after a fracture: a randomized, controlled trial. J Am Geriatr Soc 54:450–457
Leslie WD, Tsang JF, Lix LM (2008) Validation of ten-year fracture risk prediction: a clinical cohort study from the Manitoba Bone Density Program. Bone 43:667–671
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research, 2002. Originally published in Ann Intern Med 2002;137:526–528. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/3rduspstf/osteoporosis/osteorr.htm. Accessed October 2003
Hodgson SF, Watts NB, Bilezikian JP, Clarke BL, Gray TK et al (2003) American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2001 edition, with selected updates for 2003. Endocr Pract 9:544–564
Harrell FE (2001) Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer, New York
Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr, Borsboom GJ, Eijkemans MJ, Vergouwe Y, Habbema JD (2001) Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 54:774–781
Altman DG, Royston P (2000) What do we mean by validating a prognostic model? Stat Med 19:453–473
Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB (1996) Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 15:361–387
Vanasse A, Dagenais P, Niyonsenga T, Gregoire JP, Courteau J, Hemiari A (2005) Bone mineral density measurement and osteoporosis treatment after a fragility fracture in older adults: regional variation and determinants of use in Quebec. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 6:33
Schuit SC, van der Klift M, Weel AE, de Laet CE, Burger H, Seeman E, Hofman A, Uitterlinden AG, van Leeuwen JP, Pols HA (2004) Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone 34:195–202
Tosteson AN, Melton LJ 3rd, Dawson-Hughes B, Baim S, Favus MJ, Khosla S, Lindsay RL (2008) Cost-effective osteoporosis treatment thresholds: the United States perspective. Osteoporos Int 19:437–447
Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2007) Development of a nomogram for individualizing hip fracture risk in men and women. Osteoporos Int 18:1109–1117
Silverman SL (2006) Selecting patients for osteoporosis therapy. Curr Osteoporos Rep 4:91–95
Siris ES, Simon JA, Barton IP, McClung MR, Grauer A (2008) Effects of risedronate on fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. Osteoporos Int 19:681–686
Baron JA, Barrett J, Malenka D, Fisher E, Kniffin W, Bubolz T, Tosteson T (1994) Racial differences in fracture risk. Epidemiology 5:42–47
Acknowledgements
This work was sponsored by the Salt Lake City VA Geriatric, Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), the University of Utah Center on Aging Interdisciplinary Seed Grant, and by a grant from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 1 K08 HS018582-01. The authors would like to thank Kristin Knippenberg for her careful editorial assistance.
The authors would also like to acknowledge the National Cancer Institute for its support of Richard E. Nelson (1KM1CA156723).
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
LaFleur, J., Nelson, R.E., Yao, Y. et al. Validated risk rule using computerized data to identify males at high risk for fracture. Osteoporos Int 23, 1017–1027 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1646-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1646-6