Influence of bone mineral density measurement on fracture risk assessment tool® scores in postmenopausal Indian women

Aim Fracture risk assessment tool® calculations can be performed with or without addition of bone mineral density; however, the impact of this addition on fracture risk assessment tool® scores has not been studied in Indian women. Given the limited availability and high cost of bone mineral density...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Post reproductive health 2016-03, Vol.22 (1), p.20-24
Hauptverfasser: Daswani, Bhavna, Desai, Meena, Mitra, Sumegha, Gavali, Shubhangi, Patil, Anushree, Kukreja, Subhash, Khatkhatay, M Ikram
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim Fracture risk assessment tool® calculations can be performed with or without addition of bone mineral density; however, the impact of this addition on fracture risk assessment tool® scores has not been studied in Indian women. Given the limited availability and high cost of bone mineral density testing in India, it is important to know the influence of bone mineral density on fracture risk assessment tool® scores in Indian women. Therefore, our aim was to assess the contribution of bone mineral density in fracture risk assessment tool® outcome in Indian women. Methods Apparently healthy postmenopausal Indian women (n = 506), aged 40–72 years, without clinical risk factors for bone disease, were retrospectively selected, and their fracture risk assessment tool® scores calculated with and without bone mineral density were compared. Results Based on WHO criteria, 30% women were osteoporotic, 42.9% were osteopenic and 27.1% had normal bone mineral density. Fracture risk assessment tool® scores for risk of both major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture significantly increased on including bone mineral density (P  0.05, whereas, for hip fracture risk number of women eligible without bone mineral density was 2 and with bone mineral density was 17, P 
ISSN:2053-3691
2053-3705
DOI:10.1177/2053369116628722