Real world fracture prediction of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and one-minute osteoporosis risk test: An 11-year longitudinal study

IF 2.1 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Bone Reports Pub Date : 2024-02-16 DOI:10.1016/j.bonr.2024.101742
Yueh-Hsuan Sheng , Tai-Yin Wu , Chen-Kun Liaw , Sheng-Huang Hsiao , Kuan-Liang Kuo , Ching-Yao Tsai
{"title":"Real world fracture prediction of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and one-minute osteoporosis risk test: An 11-year longitudinal study","authors":"Yueh-Hsuan Sheng ,&nbsp;Tai-Yin Wu ,&nbsp;Chen-Kun Liaw ,&nbsp;Sheng-Huang Hsiao ,&nbsp;Kuan-Liang Kuo ,&nbsp;Ching-Yao Tsai","doi":"10.1016/j.bonr.2024.101742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Fractures affect people's quality of life especially in the elders. One of the most important risk factors is osteoporosis. There are many screening tools to predict osteoporosis and fractures. We aimed to compare the predictive validity of three commonly used screening tools: fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and one-minute osteoporosis risk test. Among them, OSTA and one-minute osteoporosis risk test were originally developed to predict osteoporosis risks and FRAX was to predict fracture risks.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is an 11-year longitudinal study. We enrolled 708 senior people from health examinees in Taiwan in 2010. A standardized questionnaire and blood tests were provided. Annual telephone interview was conducted to assess the real fracture status. We calculated risk scores of FRAX, OSTA, and one-minute osteoporosis risk test and compared with real-world fracture records.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The mean age of the participants were 74.9 (SD 6.4). There were 356 (50.3 %) men. From 2010 to 2020, a total of 105 (14.8 %) persons suffered from fractures. Compared to people without fractures, people with fractures had higher FRAX major osteoporotic fracture risk scores (14.0 % ± 7.6 % vs.11.3 % ± 5.7 %), higher hip fracture risk scores, and higher OSTA risk (5.9 % ± 1.4 % vs. 5.3 % ± 1.3 %). Cox regression analysis showed that hazard ratios for fracture of high FRAX risk was 1.53 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.05–2.21), and for high OSTA risk was 1.37 (95 % CI 1.04–1.82).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Only OSTA and FRAX scores were satisfactory in predicting 10-year fractures.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":9043,"journal":{"name":"Bone Reports","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 101742"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187224000093/pdfft?md5=a45cf1f36c18eea7f6aa4bb709ac8450&pid=1-s2.0-S2352187224000093-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187224000093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Fractures affect people's quality of life especially in the elders. One of the most important risk factors is osteoporosis. There are many screening tools to predict osteoporosis and fractures. We aimed to compare the predictive validity of three commonly used screening tools: fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and one-minute osteoporosis risk test. Among them, OSTA and one-minute osteoporosis risk test were originally developed to predict osteoporosis risks and FRAX was to predict fracture risks.

Methods

This is an 11-year longitudinal study. We enrolled 708 senior people from health examinees in Taiwan in 2010. A standardized questionnaire and blood tests were provided. Annual telephone interview was conducted to assess the real fracture status. We calculated risk scores of FRAX, OSTA, and one-minute osteoporosis risk test and compared with real-world fracture records.

Results

The mean age of the participants were 74.9 (SD 6.4). There were 356 (50.3 %) men. From 2010 to 2020, a total of 105 (14.8 %) persons suffered from fractures. Compared to people without fractures, people with fractures had higher FRAX major osteoporotic fracture risk scores (14.0 % ± 7.6 % vs.11.3 % ± 5.7 %), higher hip fracture risk scores, and higher OSTA risk (5.9 % ± 1.4 % vs. 5.3 % ± 1.3 %). Cox regression analysis showed that hazard ratios for fracture of high FRAX risk was 1.53 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.05–2.21), and for high OSTA risk was 1.37 (95 % CI 1.04–1.82).

Conclusions

Only OSTA and FRAX scores were satisfactory in predicting 10-year fractures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
骨折风险评估工具 (FRAX)、亚洲人骨质疏松症自我评估工具 (OSTA) 和一分钟骨质疏松症风险测试的实际骨折预测:一项为期 11 年的纵向研究
导言骨折会影响人们的生活质量,尤其是老年人。骨质疏松症是最重要的风险因素之一。有许多筛查工具可以预测骨质疏松症和骨折。我们旨在比较三种常用筛查工具的预测有效性:骨折风险评估工具(FRAX)、亚洲人骨质疏松症自我评估工具(OSTA)和一分钟骨质疏松症风险测试。其中,OSTA 和一分钟骨质疏松症风险测试最初是为了预测骨质疏松症风险而开发的,而 FRAX 则是为了预测骨折风险。2010年,我们从台湾的健康体检者中招募了708名老年人。我们提供了标准化问卷和血液检测。每年进行一次电话访问,以评估实际骨折状况。我们计算了 FRAX、OSTA 和一分钟骨质疏松症风险测试的风险分数,并与现实世界的骨折记录进行了比较。男性 356 人(50.3%)。从 2010 年到 2020 年,共有 105 人(14.8%)发生骨折。与没有骨折的人相比,骨折患者的 FRAX 主要骨质疏松性骨折风险评分更高(14.0 % ± 7.6 % 对 11.3 % ± 5.7 %),髋部骨折风险评分更高,OSTA 风险更高(5.9 % ± 1.4 % 对 5.3 % ± 1.3 %)。Cox回归分析显示,FRAX高风险的骨折危险比为1.53(95%置信区间(CI)为1.05-2.21),OSTA高风险的骨折危险比为1.37(95%置信区间(CI)为1.04-1.82)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Bone Reports
Bone Reports Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
444
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Bone Reports is an interdisciplinary forum for the rapid publication of Original Research Articles and Case Reports across basic, translational and clinical aspects of bone and mineral metabolism. The journal publishes papers that are scientifically sound, with the peer review process focused principally on verifying sound methodologies, and correct data analysis and interpretation. We welcome studies either replicating or failing to replicate a previous study, and null findings. We fulfil a critical and current need to enhance research by publishing reproducibility studies and null findings.
期刊最新文献
Identifying the best reference gene for RT-qPCR analyses of the three-dimensional osteogenic differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells Naringin promotes osteogenic potential in bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells via mediation of miR-26a/Ski axis Improvements with burosumab treatment in an early access programme for adults with X-linked hypophosphataemia: A case series of three patients Association of daily physical activity and bone microarchitecture in young adults with type 1 diabetes — A pilot exploratory study Zoledronate interrupts pre-osteoclast-induced angiogenesis via SDF-1/CXCR4 pathway
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1