Evidence Hub

Osteoporosis-related fractures after spinal cord injury: a retrospective study from Brazil

Champs APS, Maia GAG, Oliveira FG, de Melo GCN, Soares MMS

Spinal cord, 2020

325 participants

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiological and clinical profile in a retrospective chart review of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) and osteoporosis-related fractures.

SETTING: A Brazilian rehabilitation hospital.

METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review that included 325 individuals with SCI and osteoporosis-related fractures who were admitted to a Brazilian rehabilitation hospital between January 1997 and December 2017.

RESULTS: Overall, 52% were males with a mean (SD) age of 44.8 (±16.7) years at the time of first fracture. Overall, 82% had paraplegia and 56% had a thoracic neurological level. The mean (SD) time between SCI and fracture was 9.7 (±9.3) years. In 59% of cases the immediate cause of the fracture was a fall. The locations of the fractures were distal femur (27%), proximal femur (27%), and tibia and/or distal fibula (28%). The fractures occurred mostly at home (63%). Complications occurred in 19% of individuals and 25% reported worse performance in activities of daily living and 29% a deterioration in ambulation after they had recovered from the fracture. A second fracture was described in 15% of individuals, and five individuals had a third fracture. The mean (SD) level of 25 hydroxyvitamin D [25 (OH) D] was 25.6 (±15.2) ng/ml, and only 11 individuals (3%) underwent dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), and 26 individuals (8%) were treated with antiresorptive drugs after fracture.

CONCLUSION: Little is done…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 325 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free