Evidence Hub

Fractures in women with eating disorders-Incidence, predictive factors, and the impact of disease remission: Cohort study with background population controls

Jacob Frølich, L. A. Winkler, B. Abrahamsen, N. Bilenberg, A. Hermann, R. Støving

International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2020

803 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Malnutrition and low weight in eating disorders (EDs) are associated with increased fracture risk compared to the general population. In a cohort study, we aimed to determine fracture rates compared to age and gender matched controls (ratio 5:1), assess the impact of disease remission on fracture risk, and establish predictive factors for fractures.

METHOD

Of note, 803 ED patients referred to specialized ED treatment between 1994 and 2004 were included. In 2016, data on fractures were obtained through the Danish National Registry of Patients.

RESULTS

Fracture risk was increased in anorexia nervosa (AN; IRR 2.2 [CI 99%: 1.6-3.0]) but not in bulimia nervosa (BN; IRR 1.3, ns) or other specified feeding or eating disorders (OSFED; IRR 1.8, ns). IRR in the AN group were increased for vertebral fractures (IRR 3.8 [CI 99%: 1.4-10.3]), upper arm (IRR 3.0 (CI 99% 1.6-5.5) and hip (IRR 6.6 [CI 99%: 2.6-18.0]). Disease remission in AN is associated to lower fracture risk compared to active disease, but higher fracture risk compared to controls (IRR 1.7 [CI 99%: 1.1-2.7]). In regression analysis, age at debut of disease, nadir BMI and duration of disease before referral to treatment, independently predicted fracture.

DISCUSSION

We confirm increased fracture risk in AN, and show significant differences in fracture risk between patients in disease remission and patients with active disease. Furthermore, we show that age at debut of disease and duration of disease before referral…

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: 803 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