» Articles » PMID: 24617899

FRAX Without Bone Mineral Density Versus Osteoporosis Self-assessment Screening Tool As Predictors of Osteoporosis in Primary Screening of Individuals Aged 70 and Older

Overview
Specialty Geriatrics
Date 2014 Mar 13
PMID 24617899
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To compare two well-validated tools--the FRAX without bone mineral density (BMD) and the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Screening Tool (OST)--in predicting osteoporosis and to define thresholds above and below which it would be reasonable to recommend omitting BMD testing.

Design: Retrospective review.

Setting: General practices in Western Australia.

Participants: Individuals aged 70 and older responding to a prospective audit of osteoporosis investigation and management for whom dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan results and clinical risk factor data were available (N = 626).

Measurements: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared, upper and lower thresholds for omission of screening BMD were proposed, and the statistical performance measures for the tests are reported.

Results: The areas under the ROC curves for the OST (0.76-0.82) were slightly better than for FRAX without BMD 10-year major osteoporotic fracture risk (0.64-0.76) in predicting osteoporosis at the defined sites. At defined lower thresholds, the tests were comparable in identifying a group with low osteoporosis risk (sensitivity 89.6-92.2%, specificity 35.0-39.9%), translating into 33.5% to 36.1% of tests saved at a cost of missing 7.8% to 10.4% of individuals with osteoporosis on BMD criteria. It was not possible to identify a useful upper threshold.

Conclusion: At the defined thresholds, the OST is as good as FRAX without BMD in identifying a low-risk population subgroup for whom screening BMD can reasonably be omitted. This could reduce costs and improve access to treatment.

Citing Articles

Comparison of OSTA, FRAX and BMI for Predicting Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in a Han Population in Beijing: A Cross Sectional Study.

Fan Z, Li X, Zhang X, Yang Y, Fei Q, Guo A Clin Interv Aging. 2020; 15:1171-1180.

PMID: 32764904 PMC: 7381824. DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S257166.


Screening for Osteoporosis in Older Men: Operating Characteristics of Proposed Strategies for Selecting Men for BMD Testing.

Diem S, Peters K, Gourlay M, Schousboe J, Taylor B, Orwoll E J Gen Intern Med. 2017; 32(11):1235-1241.

PMID: 28815485 PMC: 5653561. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-017-4153-4.


A comparison of electronic and manual fracture risk assessment tools in screening elderly male US veterans at risk for osteoporosis.

Williams S, Lawrence P, Miller K, Crook J, LaFleur J, Cannon G Osteoporos Int. 2017; 28(11):3107-3111.

PMID: 28756457 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-017-4172-3.


Risk Assessment Tools for Osteoporosis Screening in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review.

Crandall C Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2015; 13(5):287-301.

PMID: 26233285 DOI: 10.1007/s11914-015-0282-z.


Systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for osteoporosis or low bone density.

Nayak S, Edwards D, Saleh A, Greenspan S Osteoporos Int. 2015; 26(5):1543-54.

PMID: 25644147 PMC: 4401628. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-015-3025-1.