Identifying Younger Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Using USPSTF-Recommended Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Tools.

IF 9.7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL JAMA Network Open Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0626
Henry W Zheng, Alex A T Bui, Kristine E Ensrud, Nicole C Wright, JoAnn E Manson, Nelson B Watts, Karen C Johnson, Aladdin H Shadyab, Carolyn J Crandall
{"title":"Identifying Younger Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Using USPSTF-Recommended Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Tools.","authors":"Henry W Zheng, Alex A T Bui, Kristine E Ensrud, Nicole C Wright, JoAnn E Manson, Nelson B Watts, Karen C Johnson, Aladdin H Shadyab, Carolyn J Crandall","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>For younger postmenopausal women, clinical guidelines recommend using osteoporosis risk prediction tools to identify candidates with low bone mineral density (BMD). However, the performance of these tools is not well quantified.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the performance of Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI) and Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS), compared with Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), in identifying the presence of osteoporotic BMD in younger postmenopausal women.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This cross-sectional study used data from the Women's Health Initiative Bone Density Substudy, which was conducted at 3 clinical centers in Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Birmingham, Alabama. Participants were healthy postmenopausal women aged 50 to 64 years with BMD measurements evaluated using the 3 risk prediction tools: OSIRIS, ORAI, and OST. Risk factors and other participant characteristics were compared across osteoporosis status. Data were collected from October 1993 to December 1998 and analyzed between September 23, 2023, and April 10, 2024.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>The primary exposures were OSIRIS, ORAI, and OST risk scores.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Primary outcome was osteoporosis defined by BMD T score of -2.5 or lower at 1 or more of 3 anatomical locations: femoral neck, total hip, and/or lumbar spine. The tools were evaluated via area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) at published score cutoffs and at alternate cutoffs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6067 included participants (mean [SD] age at baseline, 57.7 [4.1] years), the prevalence of osteoporosis was 14.1% (n = 857) at any 1 of 3 anatomical sites. AUC for identifying osteoporosis at any site was 0.633 (95% CI, 0.633-0.634) for OSIRIS, 0.663 (95% CI, 0.663-0.664) for ORAI, and 0.654 (95% CI, 0.654-0.655) for OST.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, 3 guideline-recommended osteoporosis risk assessment tools had fair to moderate discrimination in identifying osteoporosis defined by lowest BMD at any 1 of 3 skeletal sites. Screening is essential to reducing individual and societal burden of osteoporosis and related fractures, and this study showed a gap in identifying younger postmenopausal women using common clinical risk factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 3","pages":"e250626"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11920839/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0626","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: For younger postmenopausal women, clinical guidelines recommend using osteoporosis risk prediction tools to identify candidates with low bone mineral density (BMD). However, the performance of these tools is not well quantified.

Objective: To examine the performance of Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI) and Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS), compared with Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), in identifying the presence of osteoporotic BMD in younger postmenopausal women.

Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the Women's Health Initiative Bone Density Substudy, which was conducted at 3 clinical centers in Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Birmingham, Alabama. Participants were healthy postmenopausal women aged 50 to 64 years with BMD measurements evaluated using the 3 risk prediction tools: OSIRIS, ORAI, and OST. Risk factors and other participant characteristics were compared across osteoporosis status. Data were collected from October 1993 to December 1998 and analyzed between September 23, 2023, and April 10, 2024.

Exposures: The primary exposures were OSIRIS, ORAI, and OST risk scores.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcome was osteoporosis defined by BMD T score of -2.5 or lower at 1 or more of 3 anatomical locations: femoral neck, total hip, and/or lumbar spine. The tools were evaluated via area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) at published score cutoffs and at alternate cutoffs.

Results: Among 6067 included participants (mean [SD] age at baseline, 57.7 [4.1] years), the prevalence of osteoporosis was 14.1% (n = 857) at any 1 of 3 anatomical sites. AUC for identifying osteoporosis at any site was 0.633 (95% CI, 0.633-0.634) for OSIRIS, 0.663 (95% CI, 0.663-0.664) for ORAI, and 0.654 (95% CI, 0.654-0.655) for OST.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, 3 guideline-recommended osteoporosis risk assessment tools had fair to moderate discrimination in identifying osteoporosis defined by lowest BMD at any 1 of 3 skeletal sites. Screening is essential to reducing individual and societal burden of osteoporosis and related fractures, and this study showed a gap in identifying younger postmenopausal women using common clinical risk factors.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
使用uspstf推荐的骨质疏松风险评估工具识别年轻绝经后骨质疏松症妇女。
重要性:对于年轻的绝经后妇女,临床指南建议使用骨质疏松症风险预测工具来识别低骨密度(BMD)的候选人。然而,这些工具的性能并没有很好地量化。目的:比较骨质疏松风险评估工具(ORAI)和骨质疏松风险指数(OSIRIS)与骨质疏松自我评估工具(OST)在鉴别年轻绝经后妇女骨质疏松性骨密度方面的表现。设计、环境和参与者:这项横断面研究使用了来自妇女健康倡议骨密度亚研究的数据,该研究在亚利桑那州图森和凤凰城的3个临床中心进行;宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡;以及阿拉巴马州的伯明翰。参与者为50至64岁的健康绝经后妇女,骨密度测量使用3种风险预测工具评估:OSIRIS、ORAI和OST。对不同骨质疏松状态的参与者的危险因素和其他特征进行比较。数据收集时间为1993年10月至1998年12月,分析时间为2023年9月23日至2024年4月10日。暴露:主要暴露为OSIRIS、ORAI和OST风险评分。主要结局和测量指标:主要结局是骨质疏松症,定义为骨密度T评分在股骨颈、全髋关节和/或腰椎3个解剖位置中的1个或多个为-2.5或更低。在公布的评分截止点和交替截止点,通过受试者工作特征曲线(AUC)下的面积来评估这些工具。结果:在6067名纳入的参与者中(基线时平均[SD]年龄为57.7[4.1]岁),骨质疏松症的患病率为14.1% (n = 857)。在任何部位识别骨质疏松的AUC为OSIRIS为0.633 (95% CI, 0.633-0.634), ORAI为0.663 (95% CI, 0.663-0.664), OST为0.654 (95% CI, 0.654-0.655)。结论和相关性:在这项横断面研究中,3种指南推荐的骨质疏松症风险评估工具在3个骨骼部位中任意1个的最低骨密度定义骨质疏松症时具有公平到中度的歧视。筛查对于减少骨质疏松症和相关骨折的个人和社会负担至关重要,该研究表明,在使用常见临床危险因素识别年轻绝经后妇女方面存在差距。
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
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
期刊最新文献
Match Rates Between Home Health Assessment and Medicare Claims Data. Unionization, Ownership Status, and Direct Care Worker Turnover. Wording Change in Introduction. Police Pursuit Fatalities in the US, 2009 to 2023. Police Pursuit Fatality Rates in the US and Directions for Future Research.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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