» Articles » PMID: 23482989

Assessing Fracture Risk in People with MS: a Service Development Study Comparing Three Fracture Risk Scoring Systems

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2013 Mar 14
PMID 23482989
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Suboptimal bone health is increasingly recognised as an important cause of morbidity. Multiple sclerosis (MS) has been consistently associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fracture. Various fracture risk screening tools have been developed, two of which are in routine use and a further one is MS-specific. We set out to compare the results obtained by these in the MS clinic population.

Design: This was a service development study. The 10-year risk estimates of any fracture and hip fracture generated by each of the algorithms were compared.

Setting: The MS clinic at the Royal London Hospital.

Participants: 88 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of MS.

Outcome Measures: Mean 10-year overall fracture risk and hip fracture risk were calculated using each of the three fracture risk calculators. The number of interventions that would be required as a result of using each of these tools was also compared.

Results: Mean 10-year fracture risk was 4.7%, 2.3% and 7.6% using FRAX, QFracture and the MS-specific calculator, respectively (p<0.0001 for difference). The agreement between risk scoring tools was poor at all levels of fracture risk.

Conclusions: The agreement between these three fracture risk scoring tools is poor in the MS population. Further work is required to develop and validate an accurate fracture risk scoring system for use in MS.

Trial Registration: This service development study was approved by the Clinical Effectiveness Department at Barts Health NHS Trust (project registration number 156/12).

Citing Articles

Comparison of fracture risk calculators in elderly fallers: a hospital-based cross-sectional study.

Todorov G, Brook S, Quah Qin Xian N, Von Widekind S, Freudenthal B, Comninos A BMJ Open. 2022; 12(7):e060282.

PMID: 35820750 PMC: 9274535. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060282.


Are we responding effectively to bone mineral density loss and fracture risks in people with epilepsy?.

Miller A, Ferastraoaru V, Tabatabaie V, Gitlevich T, Spiegel R, Haut S Epilepsia Open. 2020; 5(2):240-247.

PMID: 32524049 PMC: 7278536. DOI: 10.1002/epi4.12392.


External validation and comparison of three prediction tools for risk of osteoporotic fractures using data from population based electronic health records: retrospective cohort study.

Dagan N, Cohen-Stavi C, Leventer-Roberts M, Balicer R BMJ. 2017; 356:i6755.

PMID: 28104610 PMC: 5244817. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i6755.


Risk Factors, Epidemiology and Treatment Strategies for Metabolic Bone Disease in Patients with Neurological Disease.

Binks S, Dobson R Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2016; 14(5):199-210.

PMID: 27525980 DOI: 10.1007/s11914-016-0320-5.


Novel assessment tools for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment.

Gong B, Mandair G, Wehrli F, Morris M Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2014; 12(3):357-65.

PMID: 24879507 PMC: 6218937. DOI: 10.1007/s11914-014-0215-2.


References
1.
Bazelier M, van Staa T, Uitdehaag B, Cooper C, Leufkens H, Vestergaard P . A simple score for estimating the long-term risk of fracture in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2012; 79(9):922-8. PMC: 3425841. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318266faae. View

2.
Levin L, Munger K, Rubertone M, Peck C, Lennette E, Spiegelman D . Temporal relationship between elevation of epstein-barr virus antibody titers and initial onset of neurological symptoms in multiple sclerosis. JAMA. 2005; 293(20):2496-500. DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.20.2496. View

3.
Murad M, Drake M, Mullan R, Mauck K, Stuart L, Lane M . Clinical review. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012; 97(6):1871-80. DOI: 10.1210/jc.2011-3060. View

4.
Dobson R, Ramagopalan S, Giovannoni G . Bone health and multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2012; 18(11):1522-8. DOI: 10.1177/1352458512453362. View

5.
Khan N, Harrison S, Rose P . Validity of diagnostic coding within the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2010; 60(572):e128-36. PMC: 2828861. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X483562. View