Evidence Hub

Fluoride for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic fractures: a meta-analysis

Haguenauer D, Welch V, Shea B, Tugwell P, Adachi JD, Wells G

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2000

1,429 participants

Abstract

We conducted an effectiveness meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of fluoride therapy on bone loss, vertebral and nonvertebral fractures and side effects in postmenopausal women. A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, Current Contents and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials which met predetermined inclusion criteria. They independently extracted data using predetermined forms and assessed the methodologic quality of the trials using a validated scale. For dichotomous outcomes, the relative risk (RR) was calculated, and for continuous outcomes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) of percentage change from baseline was calculated. Where heterogeneity existed (determined by a chi-square test) a random effects model was used. Eleven studies (1429 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. The increase in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) was found to be higher in the treatment group than in the control group with a WMD 8.1% (95% CI: 7.15, 9.09) after 2 years of treatment and 16.1% (95% CI: 14.65, 17.5) after 4 years. The RR for new vertebral fractures was not significant at 2 years [0.87 (95% CI: 0.51, 1.46)] or at 4 years [0.9 (95% CI: 0.71, 1.14)]. The RR for new nonvertebral fractures was not significant at 2 years [1.2 (95% CI: 0.68, 2.10)] but was increased at 4 years in the treated group [1.85 (95% CI: 1.36, 2.50)], especially if used at high doses and in a non-slow-release form. The RR for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,429 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