Evidence Hub

Influence of fracture history and bone mineral density testing on the treatment of osteoporosis in two non-academic community centers

Hamel ME, Sebaldt RJ, Siminoski K, Adachi JD, Papadimitropoulos E, Petrie A, Goldsmith CH

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2005

1,144 participants

Abstract

A history of fracture and a low bone mineral density (BMD) are the strongest predictors of future osteoporotic fracture. This prospective cohort study assessed the impact of these two factors on treatment patterns in women undergoing their first BMD testing in a non-academic community setting. Successive women seen for first BMD testing at two testing centers completed a baseline questionnaire and a mailed 3-month follow-up questionnaire. Patients were grouped by history of fracture after age 20 years (present, absent) and by BMD result [osteoporosis (OP), osteopenia (OPN), normal BMD]. Thirty percent of 1144 patients at least 45 years old reported a history of fracture after age 20 years. They were no more likely than those without a history of fracture to be taking calcium (52% of total), vitamin D (31%), estrogen (31%), or a bisphosphonate (2%) before BMD testing. The BMD testing revealed OP in 20%, OPN in 45%, and normal BMD in 35%. Three months later, the percentages of patients taking treatments differed as follows: calcium (66 vs 53% in OP and OPN groups vs normal BMD), vitamin D (46 vs 37% in OPN group vs normal BMD), estrogen (25 vs 36 vs 44% in groups with OP, OPN, and normal BMD), a bisphosphonate (43 vs 11 vs 1%), and at least one of estrogen or a bisphosphonate (58 vs 43 vs 46%). Treatment decisions were influenced by first BMD testing but not significantly by a history of fracture. There is a substantial care gap in the treatment of patients with OP: either…

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: 1,144 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