Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A clinical decision rule to enhance targeted bone mineral density testing in healthy mid-life women

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Osteoporosis International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Summary

The rates of bone mineral density testing for osteoporosis among healthy mid-life women are high, although their osteoporosis or fracture risk is low. To reduce unnecessary testing, we created and evaluated a tool to guide bone density testing based on the woman’s age, weight, fracture history, and menopausal status.

Introduction

This study aims to improve case finding of mid-life women with low bone mass on bone mineral density (BMD) assessment.

Methods

Among healthy women aged 40–60 years having their first BMD test, osteoporosis risk factors were assessed by questionnaire and BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The combination of risk factors that best discriminated women with/without low bone mass (T-score ≤ −2.0) was determined from the logistic regression model area under the curve (AUC) and internally validated using bootstrapping. Using the model odds ratios, a clinical prediction rule was created and its discriminative properties assessed and compared with that of the osteoporosis self-assessment tool (OST). Sensitivity analyses examined results for pre-/peri- and post-menopausal women, separately.

Results

Of 1,664 women referred for baseline BMD testing, 433 with conditions known to be associated with bone loss were excluded. Of 1,231 eligible women, 944 (77%) participated and 87 (9.2%) had low bone mass (35 pre-/peri- and 52 post-menopausal). Four risk factors for low bone mass were identified and incorporated into a clinical prediction rule. Selecting women for BMD testing with weight of ≤70 kg or any two of age >51, years’ post-menopause of ≥1, and history of fragility fracture after age 40 was associated with 93% sensitivity to identify women with low bone mass, compared with 47% sensitivity for an OST score of ≤1 (AUC 0.75 versus OST AUC 0.69, p = 0.04). Results restricted to post-menopausal women were similar.

Conclusions

Among healthy mid-life women receiving a baseline BMD test, few had low bone mass, supporting the need for guidance about testing. A prediction rule with four risk factors had improved sensitivity over the OST. Further validation is warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Papaioannou A, Morin S, Cheung AM, Atkinson S, Brown JP, Feldman S, Hanley DA, Hodsman A, Jamal SA, Kaiser SM, Kvern B, Siminoski K, Leslie WD (2010) 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary. CMAJ 182:1864–1873

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kanis JA, Gluer CC (2000) An update on the diagnosis and assessment of osteoporosis with densitometry. Committee of Scientific Advisors, International Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporos Int 11:192–202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jaglal SB (2002) Bone density testing. In Stewart DE, Ferris L, Hyman I et al (eds) Ontario Women’s Health Status Report. pp 113–120

  4. Ettinger B, Hillier TA, Pressman A, Che M, Hanley DA (2005) Simple computer model for calculating and reporting 5-year osteoporotic fracture risk in postmenopausal women. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 14:159–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Siminoski K, Leslie WD, Frame H, Hodsman A, Josse RG, Khan A, Lentle BC, Levesque J, Lyons DJ, Tarulli G, Brown JP (2007) Recommendations for bone mineral density reporting in Canada: a shift to absolute fracture risk assessment. J Clin Densitom 10:120–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Data source: Ontario Health Insurance Plan claims data. 2009

  7. Waugh EJ, Lam MA, Hawker GA, McGowan J, Papaioannou A, Cheung AM, Hodsman AB, Leslie WD, Siminoski K, Jamal SA (2009) Risk factors for low bone mass in healthy 40–60 year old women: a systematic review of the literature. Osteoporos Int 20:1–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Jaglal SB, Hawker G, Cameron C, Canavan J, Beaton D, Bogoch E, Jain R, Papaioannou A (2010) The Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy: implementation of a population-based osteoporosis action plan in Canada. Osteoporos Int 21:903–908

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gourlay ML, Miller WC, Richy F, Garrett JM, Hanson LC, Reginster JY (2005) Performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools in postmenopausal women aged 45–64 years. Osteoporos Int 16:921–927

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Murray TM, McIsaac WJ, Joseph L, Brown JP (2001) Evaluation of decision rules for referring women for bone densitometry by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. JAMA 286:57–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr, Borsboom GJ, Eijkemans MJ, Vergouwe Y, Habbema JD (2001) Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 54:774–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Geusens P, Dumitrescu B, van Geel T, van Helden S, Vanhoof J, Dinant GJ (2008) Impact of systematic implementation of a clinical case finding strategy on diagnosis and therapy of postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 23:812–818

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jaglal SB, Carroll J, Hawker G, McIsaac WJ, Jaakkimainen L, Cadarette SM, Cameron C, Davis D (2003) How are family physicians managing osteoporosis? Qualitative study of their experiences and educational needs. Can Fam Physician 49:462–468

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cadarette SM, McIsaac WJ, Hawker GA, Jaakkimainen L, Culbert A, Zarifa G, Ola E, Jaglal SB (2004) The validity of decision rules for selecting women with primary osteoporosis for bone mineral density testing. Osteoporos Int 15:361–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McLeod KM, Johnson CS (2009) Identifying women with low bone mass: a systematic review of screening tools. Geriatr Nurs 30:164–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Martinez-Aguila D, Gomez-Vaquero C, Rozadilla A, Romera M, Narvaez J, Nolla JM (2007) Decision rules for selecting women for bone mineral density testing: application in postmenopausal women referred to a bone densitometry unit. J Rheumatol 34:1307–1312

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Geusens P, Hochberg MC, van der Voort DJ, Pols H, van der Klift M, Siris E, Melton ME, Turpin J, Byrnes C, Ross P (2002) Performance of risk indices for identifying low bone density in postmenopausal women. Mayo Clin Proc 77:629–637

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF), American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Radiology, American College of Rheumatology, American Geriatrics Society, American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, The Endocrine Society (1999) Osteoporosis: Physician’s Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. Excerpta Medica, Inc, Belle Mead

    Google Scholar 

  19. Michaelsson K, Bergstrom R, Mallmin H, Holmberg L, Wolk A, Ljunghall S (1996) Screening for osteopenia and osteoporosis: selection by body composition. Osteoporos Int 6:120–126

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Waugh EJ, Polivy J, Ridout R, Hawker GA (2007) A prospective investigation of the relations among cognitive dietary restraint, subclinical ovulatory disturbances, physical activity, and bone mass in healthy young women. Am J Clin Nutr 86:1791–1801

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mackelvie KJ, Khan KM, McKay HA (2002) Is there a critical period for bone response to weight-bearing exercise in children and adolescents? a systematic review. Br J Sports Med 36:250–257

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hawker GA, Jamal SA, Ridout R, Chase C (2002) A clinical prediction rule to identify premenopausal women with low bone mass. Osteoporos Int 13:400–406

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hui SL, Perkins AJ, Zhou L, Longcope C, Econs MJ, Peacock M, McClintock C, Johnston CC Jr (2002) Bone loss at the femoral neck in premenopausal white women: effects of weight change and sex-hormone levels. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 87:1539–1543

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Langsetmo L, Goltzman D, Kovacs CS, Adachi JD, Hanley DA, Kreiger N, Josse R, Papaioannou A, Olszynski WP, Jamal SA (2009) Repeat low-trauma fractures occur frequently among men and women who have osteopenic BMD. J Bone Miner Res 24:1515–1522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cranney A, Jamal SA, Tsang JF, Josse RG, Leslie WD (2007) Low bone mineral density and fracture burden in postmenopausal women. CMAJ 177:575–580

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hodsman AB, Leslie WD, Tsang JF, Gamble GD (2008) 10-year probability of recurrent fractures following wrist and other osteoporotic fractures in a large clinical cohort: an analysis from the Manitoba Bone Density Program. Arch Intern Med 168:2261–2267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Giangregorio LM, Leslie WD, Manitoba Bone Density Program (2010) Time since prior fracture is a risk modifier for 10-year osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 25:1400–1405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kroger H, Tuppurainen M, Honkanen R, Alhava E, Saarikoski S (1994) Bone mineral density and risk factors for osteoporosis—a population-based study of 1600 perimenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 55:1–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Tuppurainen M, Kroger H, Saarikoski S, Honkanen R, Alhava E (1995) The effect of gynecological risk factors on lumbar and femoral bone mineral density in peri- and postmenopausal women. Maturitas 21:137–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding source

This study was funded by a grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Hawker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hawker, G., Mendel, A., Lam, M.A. et al. A clinical decision rule to enhance targeted bone mineral density testing in healthy mid-life women. Osteoporos Int 23, 1931–1938 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1862-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1862-0

Keywords

Navigation