Osteoporosis International最新文献

Vitamin D status has long been related to falls risk. In this planned secondary analysis of a vitamin supplementation trial in postmenopausal women, standardized 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration up to 60 ng/mL was not associated with increased falls. Women with 25(OH)D ≥ 60 ng/mL had higher odds of ≥ 2 falls.

Purpose: Falls are common and cause fractures. High circulating 25(OH)D may increase falls risk; thus, recent guidance recommends 25(OH)D not exceed 50 ng/mL. Prior falls studies have not reported standardized 25(OH)D (s25D) data. The purpose of this planned secondary analysis of a 4-year calcium/vitamin D supplementation trial was to evaluate the association of s25D with falls.

Methods: This study recruited 2,303 postmenopausal women. The analytic dataset consisted of pooled concatenated data from years 2-4 (N_Total = 5,732). Serum 25(OH)D was measured annually and subsequently retrospectively standardized using Vitamin D Standardization Program methods. Falls were recorded by diary. Incidence for ≥ 1 fall and ≥ 2 falls was assessed by s25D group (≤ 20, 20- < 30, 30- < 40, 40- < 50, 50- < 60 and ≥ 60 ng/mL) using multivariable logistic regression.

Results: Mean (SD) baseline s25D was 32.6 ng/mL (8.3) with no difference between supplement and placebo groups. s25D increased to 41.3 ng/mL at year 2 in the supplement group then remained stable. By s25D group, incidence for ≥ 1 fall varied from 22-32% (p = 0.19). For ≥ 2 falls incidence varied (p = 0.03) from 6% (< 20 ng/mL) to 17% (≥ 60 ng/mL.) There was no significant association between s25D and ≥ 1 fall. Those with s25D ≥ 60 ng/mL had a higher adjusted odds of ≥ 2 falls (OR = 1.99 ± 1.2-3.3) compared to women with s25D of 30- < 40 ng/mL.

Conclusion: s25D up to 60 ng/mL was not associated with greater risk for ≥ 1 or ≥ 2 falls. Women with a s25D ≥ 60 ng/mL were at higher odds for ≥ 2 falls, however this group included only ~ 2% of study observations; therefore, confirmation in other cohorts is necessary.

Little is known regarding osteoporosis management between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA). MA beneficiaries had higher rates of osteoporosis testing and higher rates of osteoporosis drug treatment initiation rates. Following an osteoporotic fragility fracture, MA beneficiaries were more likely to be prescribed osteoporosis treatment. While osteoporosis testing and treatment initiation rates are low in both TM and MA, rates tended to be higher in MA.

Purpose: Osteoporosis represents a substantial clinical challenge in the United States, particularly for older women, and requires effective care coordination. Medicare Advantage (MA) plans have financial incentives in the form of star ratings to improve osteoporosis testing and treatment. The objective of this study was to compare osteoporosis management practices between Traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries and MA female enrollees.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using a nationally representative 20% sample of 2017-2019 TM claims and MA encounter records. We identified 2,994,203 female TM beneficiaries and 1,924,132 MA enrollees. The exposure was enrollment in MA. The primary outcomes were the rates of guideline-recommended bone mineral density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis drug initiation following a new osteoporosis diagnosis and after a new osteoporotic fragility fracture.

Results: MA beneficiaries had higher unadjusted (22.0% vs. 19.8% in TM; P < 0.001) and adjusted rates (0.8 percentage points [p.p.] higher; P < 0.001) of BMD testing. Osteoporosis drug treatment initiation rates were higher in the MA cohort, both unadjusted (24.9% vs. 20.3% in TM; P < 0.001) and adjusted (4.0 p.p. higher; P < 0.001). Following an osteoporotic fragility fracture, MA beneficiaries were more likely to be prescribed pharmacologic treatment (28.7% vs. 21.1% in TM; P < 0.001), with an adjusted increase of 5.9 p.p (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Overall osteoporosis testing and treatment initiation rates in both TM and MA enrollees were low, with improved rates in MA compared to TM.

The importance of osteoporosis assessment before lumbar surgery is well recognized. The MRI-based Vertebral Bone Quality (VBQ) score is introduced to evaluate bone quality; however, its diagnostic value has not been well documented. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to summarize the diagnostic value of the VBQ score for osteoporosis or osteopenia in patients undergoing lumbar surgery. We comprehensively searched electronic databases for studies exploring the diagnostic accuracy of the VBQ score for osteoporosis/osteopenia in patients with lumbar disease following the PRISMA guidelines. The quality of the included studies was assessed. The VBQ scores were compared between the groups, and the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were calculated. Publication bias was assessed, and meta-regression was conducted. We included 17 studies with a total of 2815 patients, with a mean age of 66.4 years and a percentage of females of 72.5%. According to the QUADAS-2 tool, the quality of the included studies was relatively high. The results showed a significantly higher VBQ score in the osteoporosis/osteopenia group compared with the control group. According to the mean VBQ cutoff value of 3.02 ± 0.38 for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.76 and 0.74, respectively, and the AUC was 0.81. According to the mean VBQ cutoff value of 2.31 ± 0.18 for the diagnosis of osteopenia, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 and 0.58, respectively, and the AUC was 0.76. The MRI-based VBQ score could provide useful information for identifying patients with low bone mass who need further evaluation. Future prospective studies are still needed to evaluate the complementary role of the VBQ score.

While US Asian and Pacific Islander adults have lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels than White adults, ethnic subgroup data remain limited. In a large California population, the adjusted prevalence of 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L) was 1.5- to 2.7-fold higher for Asian/Pacific Islander compared to White adults, with substantial variation by ethnicity.

Purpose: US Asian and Pacific Islander (PI) adults generally have lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels than non-Hispanic White (NHW) adults, but subgroup data remain limited. We compared sex- and ethnicity-specific prevalence of low 25(OH)D among older Asian/PI and NHW adults.

Methods: Data from 102,556 Asian/PI and 381,724 NHW adults aged 50-89 years with measured 25(OH)D in 2012-2019 and body mass index (BMI, within ± 1 year) were examined in a California healthcare system. Low 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L) was examined by race and ethnicity. Covariates included age, smoking, BMI, and season of measurement. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (aPR), adjusting for covariates.

Results: Among 31,287 Asian/PI men and 71,269 Asian/PI women, the prevalence of low 25(OH)D was 22.6% and 14.7%, respectively, significantly higher than observed for 122,162 NHW men (12.3%) and 259,562 NHW women (9.9%). Within Asian/PI subgroups, low 25(OH)D prevalence ranged from 17 to 18% (Korean, Japanese, Filipino), 22 to 24% (Chinese, Vietnamese), 28% (South Asian), and 35% (Native Hawaiian/PI) among men and 11 to 14% (Japanese, Filipina, Chinese, Korean), 17 to 18% (South Asian, Vietnamese), and 26% (Native Hawaiian/PI) among women. The corresponding aPRs (NHW reference) for men and women were as follows: Native Hawaiian/PI, 2.70 and 2.34; South Asian, 2.56 and 2.07; Vietnamese, 2.17 and 2.31; Chinese, 2.04 and 1.89; Korean, 1.60 and 1.85; Filipino, 1.58 and 1.52; and Japanese, 1.58 and 1.49 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: In a large US healthcare population of older Asian/PI adults, low 25(OH)D prevalence was 1.5- to 2.7-fold higher for Asian/PI compared to NHW adults, with substantial variation by sex and ethnicity.

Purpose: To identify the optimal statistical approach for predicting the risk of fragility fractures in the presence of competing event of death.

Methods: We used real-world data from the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study that has monitored 3035 elderly participants for bone health and mortality. Fragility fractures were ascertained radiologically. Mortality was confirmed by the State Registry. We considered four statistical models for predicting fracture risk: (i) conventional Cox's proportional hazard model, (ii) cause-specific model, (iii) Fine-Gray sub-distribution model, and (iv) multistate model. These models were fitted and validated in the development (60% of the original sample) and validation (40%) subsets, respectively. The model performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration analyses.

Results: During a median follow-up of 11.3 years (IQR: 7.2, 16.2), 628 individuals (34.5%) in the development cohort fractured, and 630 (34.6%) died without a fracture. Neither the discrimination nor the 5-year prediction performance was significantly different among the models, though the conventional model tended to overestimate fracture risk (calibration-in-the-large index =  - 0.24; 95% CI: - 0.43, - 0.06). For 10-year risk prediction, the multistate model (calibration-in-the-large index =  - 0.05; 95% CI: - 0.20, 0.10) outperformed the cause-specific (- 0.23; - 0.30, - 0.08), Fine-Gray (- 0.31; - 0.46, - 0.16), and conventional model (- 0.54; - 0.70, - 0.39) which significantly overestimated fracture risk.

Conclusion: Adjustment for competing risk of death has minimum impact on the short-term prediction of fracture. However, the multistate model yields the most accurate prediction of long-term fracture risk and should be considered for predictive research in the elderly, who are also at high mortality risk. Fracture risk assessment might be compromised by the competing event of death. This study, using real-world data found a multistate model was superior to the current competing risk methods in fracture risk assessment. A multistate model is considered an optimal statistical method for predictive research in the elderly.

Designing appropriate diagnostic and treatment methods to reduce fall risk and improve quality of life, as well as reduce the cost of care in elderlies. Our findings have potential for early diagnosis of those with a high probability of falling based on fairly simple clinical measures of hyperkyphosis, forward head, and lordosis.

Introduction: Poor balance is an underlying cause of falling in the elderly, for which a change in the natural curvature of the spine plays a major role. Little is known about the relationship between spinal curvatures and fall incidence in this population. We primarily aimed to investigate the relationship between sagittal plane spinal curvatures and fall incidence over 1 year among nursing facility residents. Secondarily, we aim to determine associations of sagittal plane spinal curvatures with participants' perception of fall risk and balance capability.

Methods: Participants (100 residents mean age 70.17 ± 6.01 years) underwent standing measures of sagittal plane spinal curvatures (flexible ruler technique) and forward displacement of the head relative to the cervical spine. The Tinetti Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA) and Fall Efficacy Scale assessed participants' perception of balance and fear of falling. Incident falls were self-reported monthly and tracked across 1 year. Spearman's correlations and logistic regression evaluated associations between fall incidence and spinal curvature. Predictive performance of spinal curvature and fall risk was determined by the corresponding ROC for defining a cut-off for variables of spinal curvature and fall risk indicators.

Results: Predictive performance of spinal curvature and fall risk factors indicated 84% and 77% of participants were correctly classified using models of kyphosis and head angle, respectively.

Conclusions: Our study adds new data on spinal curvatures and incident falls among nursing facility residents. Efforts are needed to intervene to counter progression of spinal curvatures and improve fall prevention practices.

Objectives: Previous evidence suggests that bisphosphonates (BPs) may lower the risk of recurrent fractures and enhance functional recovery in patients with fractures. However, there has been controversy regarding the optimal timing of treatment initiation for patients with fragility fractures. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence on the use of BPs during the perioperative period and compared it to both non-perioperative periods and non-usage.

Methods: Electronic searches were performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library published before February 2023, without any language restrictions. The primary outcomes included fracture healing rate, healing time, and new fractures. We also examined a wide range of secondary outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used.

Results: A total of 19 clinical trials involving 2543 patients were included in this meta-analysis. When comparing patients with non-perioperative BPs use in 4-6 weeks and approximately 10-12 weeks post-surgically, the overall risk ratios (RRs) of perioperative BPs use for healing rate were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.81, 1.38, p=0.69) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.11, p=0.65), respectively, suggesting no difference in healing rate between perioperative and non-perioperative BP initiation. For healing time, the overall mean difference between perioperative and non-perioperative periods was -0.19 week (95% CI: -1.03, 0.64, p=0.65) at approximately 10-12 weeks, indicating no significant impact of perioperative BP initiation on healing time. In terms of new fractures, the overall RR with BP use was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.17-0.73, p=0.005), when compared to patients without BPs use. This suggests a protective impact of BP use against new fractures compared to patients without BP use. Perioperative BP use was associated with a markedly higher likelihood of having adverse experiences, including fever (RR: 23.78, 95% CI: 8.29, 68.21, p< 0.001), arthralgia (RR: 10.20, 95% CI: 2.41, 43.16, p=0.002), and myalgia (RR: 9.42, 95% CI: 2.54, 34.87, p< 0.001), compared with non-BPs use.

Conclusions: Treatment with BP during the perioperative period does not affect the healing process and has positive effects on therapy for patients with fragility fractures. These compelling findings underscore the potential efficacy of BP use during the perioperative period as a viable treatment option for patients with fragility fractures.