社区老年人骨质疏松症风险筛查:范围界定综述。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-24 DOI:10.1519/JPT.0000000000000381
Mariana Wingood, Michelle G Criss, Kent E Irwin, Christina Freshman, Emma L Phillips, Puneet Dhaliwal, Kevin K Chui
{"title":"社区老年人骨质疏松症风险筛查:范围界定综述。","authors":"Mariana Wingood,&nbsp;Michelle G Criss,&nbsp;Kent E Irwin,&nbsp;Christina Freshman,&nbsp;Emma L Phillips,&nbsp;Puneet Dhaliwal,&nbsp;Kevin K Chui","doi":"10.1519/JPT.0000000000000381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Due to potential health-related consequences of osteoporosis (OP), health care providers who do not order imaging, such as physical therapists, should be aware of OP screening tools that identify individuals who need medical and rehabilitation care. However, current knowledge and guidance on screening tools is limited. Therefore, we explored OP screening tools that are appropriate and feasible for physical therapy practice, and evaluated tools' effectiveness by examining their clinimetric properties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, PEDro, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Articles were included if the study population was 50 years and older, had a diagnosis of OP, if the screening tool was within the scope of physical therapy practice, and was compared to either a known diagnosis of OP or bone densitometry scan results. Included articles underwent multiple reviews for inclusion and exclusion, with each review round having a different randomly selected pair of reviewers. Data were extracted from included articles for participant demographics, outcome measures, cut-off values, and clinimetric properties. Results were categorized with positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) based on the magnitude of change in the probability of having or not having OP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>+LRs ranged from 0.15 to 20.21, with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) having a large shift in posttest probability. -LRs ranged from 0.03 to 1.00, with the FRAX, Male Osteoporosis Risk Estimation Scores, Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), and Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation having a large shift in posttest probability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Tools with moderate-large shift for both +LR and -LR recommended for use are: (1) OST; (2) FRAX; and (3) SOF. The variability in cut-off scores and clinimetric properties based on gender, age, and race/ethnicities made it impossible to provide one specific recommendation for an OP screening tool. Future research should focus on OP risk prediction among males and racial and ethnic groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":49035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening for Osteoporosis Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Mariana Wingood,&nbsp;Michelle G Criss,&nbsp;Kent E Irwin,&nbsp;Christina Freshman,&nbsp;Emma L Phillips,&nbsp;Puneet Dhaliwal,&nbsp;Kevin K Chui\",\"doi\":\"10.1519/JPT.0000000000000381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Due to potential health-related consequences of osteoporosis (OP), health care providers who do not order imaging, such as physical therapists, should be aware of OP screening tools that identify individuals who need medical and rehabilitation care. However, current knowledge and guidance on screening tools is limited. Therefore, we explored OP screening tools that are appropriate and feasible for physical therapy practice, and evaluated tools' effectiveness by examining their clinimetric properties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, PEDro, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Articles were included if the study population was 50 years and older, had a diagnosis of OP, if the screening tool was within the scope of physical therapy practice, and was compared to either a known diagnosis of OP or bone densitometry scan results. Included articles underwent multiple reviews for inclusion and exclusion, with each review round having a different randomly selected pair of reviewers. Data were extracted from included articles for participant demographics, outcome measures, cut-off values, and clinimetric properties. Results were categorized with positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) based on the magnitude of change in the probability of having or not having OP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>+LRs ranged from 0.15 to 20.21, with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) having a large shift in posttest probability. -LRs ranged from 0.03 to 1.00, with the FRAX, Male Osteoporosis Risk Estimation Scores, Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), and Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation having a large shift in posttest probability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Tools with moderate-large shift for both +LR and -LR recommended for use are: (1) OST; (2) FRAX; and (3) SOF. The variability in cut-off scores and clinimetric properties based on gender, age, and race/ethnicities made it impossible to provide one specific recommendation for an OP screening tool. Future research should focus on OP risk prediction among males and racial and ethnic groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0000000000000381\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/2/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0000000000000381","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:由于骨质疏松症(OP)潜在的健康相关后果,不订购成像的医疗保健提供者,如理疗师,应了解OP筛查工具,以识别需要医疗和康复护理的个人。然而,目前关于筛查工具的知识和指导是有限的。因此,我们探索了适用于物理治疗实践的OP筛查工具,并通过检查其临床特性来评估工具的有效性。方法:系统检索PubMed、PEDro、PsycINFO、CINAHL和Web of Science等数据库。如果研究人群年龄在50岁及以上,诊断为OP,如果筛查工具在物理治疗实践范围内,并与已知的OP诊断或骨密度测量扫描结果进行比较,则纳入文章。纳入的文章进行了多次纳入和排除评审,每轮评审都有一对不同的随机选择的评审员。数据从纳入的文章中提取,涉及参与者的人口统计、结果测量、临界值和临床特性。根据患有或不患有OP的概率变化幅度,将结果分为正似然比和负似然比(+LR/-LR)。结果:+LR的范围为0.15至20.21,骨折风险评估工具(FRAX)和骨质疏松性骨折研究(SOF)的测试后概率变化较大-LRs范围为0.03至1.00,FRAX、男性骨质疏松症风险评估评分、骨质疏松症自我评估工具(OST)和简单计算的骨质疏松症危险评估在测试后概率上有很大变化。结论:建议使用+LR和-LR均具有中大型移位的工具有:(1)OST;(2) FRAX;和(3)SOF。基于性别、年龄和种族/民族的临界分数和临床特性的可变性使得无法为OP筛查工具提供一个具体的建议。未来的研究应侧重于男性、种族和民族群体的OP风险预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Screening for Osteoporosis Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review.

Background and purpose: Due to potential health-related consequences of osteoporosis (OP), health care providers who do not order imaging, such as physical therapists, should be aware of OP screening tools that identify individuals who need medical and rehabilitation care. However, current knowledge and guidance on screening tools is limited. Therefore, we explored OP screening tools that are appropriate and feasible for physical therapy practice, and evaluated tools' effectiveness by examining their clinimetric properties.

Methods: A systematic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, PEDro, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Articles were included if the study population was 50 years and older, had a diagnosis of OP, if the screening tool was within the scope of physical therapy practice, and was compared to either a known diagnosis of OP or bone densitometry scan results. Included articles underwent multiple reviews for inclusion and exclusion, with each review round having a different randomly selected pair of reviewers. Data were extracted from included articles for participant demographics, outcome measures, cut-off values, and clinimetric properties. Results were categorized with positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) based on the magnitude of change in the probability of having or not having OP.

Results: +LRs ranged from 0.15 to 20.21, with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) having a large shift in posttest probability. -LRs ranged from 0.03 to 1.00, with the FRAX, Male Osteoporosis Risk Estimation Scores, Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), and Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation having a large shift in posttest probability.

Conclusion: Tools with moderate-large shift for both +LR and -LR recommended for use are: (1) OST; (2) FRAX; and (3) SOF. The variability in cut-off scores and clinimetric properties based on gender, age, and race/ethnicities made it impossible to provide one specific recommendation for an OP screening tool. Future research should focus on OP risk prediction among males and racial and ethnic groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy
Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy is the leading source of clinically applicable evidence for achieving optimal health, wellness, mobility, and physical function across the continuum of health status for the aging adult. The mission of the Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy is building a community that advances the profession of physical therapy to optimize the experience of aging.
期刊最新文献
A Scoping Review of the Predictive Qualities of Walking Speed in Older Adults. Associations of Usual and Fast Gait Speed With Physical Performance and Balance Confidence in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Implications for Assessment. Simple Mobility Tests Predict Use of Assistive Devices in Older Adults. Step Test Evaluation of Performance on Stairs (STEPS): Assessing Stair Function in Older Adults. The Power of Language: Words to Mend or Fuel Ageism Within Geriatrics.
×
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