Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Osteoporosis International 5/2004

01-05-2004 | Original Article

The validity of decision rules for selecting women with primary osteoporosis for bone mineral density testing

Authors: Suzanne M. Cadarette, Warren J. McIsaac, Gillian A. Hawker, Liisa Jaakkimainen, Alison Culbert, Gihane Zarifa, Ebele Ola, Susan B. Jaglal

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Issue 5/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI), Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) chart and equation, and a criterion based on body weight for identifying women with asymptomatic primary osteoporosis. Prospective recruitment and chart abstractions from family practices of three University affiliated hospitals were completed for women aged 45 years or more with baseline bone mineral density (BMD) testing results by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Those taking bone active medication other than hormone therapy, with prior fragility fracture or with risk factors for secondary osteoporosis were excluded. Women were categorized as being normal, osteopenic or osteoporotic by lowest BMD T-score at either the femoral neck or lumbar spine (L1–L4). Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to identify those with osteoporosis were determined for each decision rule. The positive predictive value (PPV) for detecting osteoporosis after using a second cut point to convert each decision rule into a risk index (low, moderate or high risk) was also determined. The sensitivity of the decision rules to identify women with osteoporosis ranged from 92% to 95% and specificity from 35% to 46%. The area under the ROC curves were significantly better for the ORAI (0.80), OST chart (0.82) and OST equation (0.82) compared with the body weight criterion (0.73). PPV for detecting osteoporosis ranged from 30% to 58% among women deemed at high risk. These data confirm the validity of the ORAI, the OST chart and the OST equation as screening tools for BMD testing. Further evidence is required to confirm the validity of the body weight criterion.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Genant HK, Cooper C, Poor G et al. (1999) Interim report and recommendations of the World Health Organization task-force for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 10:259–264CrossRefPubMed Genant HK, Cooper C, Poor G et al. (1999) Interim report and recommendations of the World Health Organization task-force for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 10:259–264CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference US Preventive Services Task Force (2002) Screening for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: Recommendations and rationale. Ann Int Med 137:526–528PubMed US Preventive Services Task Force (2002) Screening for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: Recommendations and rationale. Ann Int Med 137:526–528PubMed
3.
go back to reference Brown JP, Josse RG, for the Scientific Advisory Council of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada (2002) 2002 Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. CMAJ 167:S1–S34PubMed Brown JP, Josse RG, for the Scientific Advisory Council of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada (2002) 2002 Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. CMAJ 167:S1–S34PubMed
4.
go back to reference Sambrook PN, Seeman E, Phillips SR, Ebeling PR (2002) Preventing osteoporosis: outcomes of the Australian fracture prevention summit. Med J Aust 176:S1–S16PubMed Sambrook PN, Seeman E, Phillips SR, Ebeling PR (2002) Preventing osteoporosis: outcomes of the Australian fracture prevention summit. Med J Aust 176:S1–S16PubMed
5.
go back to reference Nelson HD, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Allan JD (2002) Screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a review of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Int Med 137:529–541PubMed Nelson HD, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Allan JD (2002) Screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a review of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Int Med 137:529–541PubMed
6.
go back to reference Bates DW, Black DM, Cummings SR (2002) Clinical use of bone densitometry: clinical applications. JAMA 288:1898–1900CrossRefPubMed Bates DW, Black DM, Cummings SR (2002) Clinical use of bone densitometry: clinical applications. JAMA 288:1898–1900CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Irwig L, Bossuyt P, Glasziou P, Gatsonis C, Lijmer J (2002) Designing studies to ensure that estimates of test accuracy are transferable. BMJ 321:669–671CrossRef Irwig L, Bossuyt P, Glasziou P, Gatsonis C, Lijmer J (2002) Designing studies to ensure that estimates of test accuracy are transferable. BMJ 321:669–671CrossRef
8.
go back to reference McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC et al. (2000) Users’ guides to the medical literature. XXII: How to use articles about clinical decision rules. JAMA 284:79–84CrossRefPubMed McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC et al. (2000) Users’ guides to the medical literature. XXII: How to use articles about clinical decision rules. JAMA 284:79–84CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Kreiger N et al. (2000) Development and validation of the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. CMAJ 162:1289–1294PubMed Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Kreiger N et al. (2000) Development and validation of the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. CMAJ 162:1289–1294PubMed
10.
go back to reference Michaëlsson K, Bergström R, Mallmin H et al. (1996) Screening for osteopenia and osteoporosis: selection by body composition. Osteoporos Int 6:120–126PubMed Michaëlsson K, Bergström R, Mallmin H et al. (1996) Screening for osteopenia and osteoporosis: selection by body composition. Osteoporos Int 6:120–126PubMed
11.
go back to reference Koh LKH, Ben Sedrine W, Torralba TP et al. (2001) A simple tool to identify Asian women at increased risk of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 12:699–705CrossRefPubMed Koh LKH, Ben Sedrine W, Torralba TP et al. (2001) A simple tool to identify Asian women at increased risk of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 12:699–705CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Sedrine WB, Chevallier T, Zegels B et al. (2002) Development and assessment of the Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS) to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. Gynecol Endocrinol 16:245–250PubMed Sedrine WB, Chevallier T, Zegels B et al. (2002) Development and assessment of the Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS) to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. Gynecol Endocrinol 16:245–250PubMed
13.
go back to reference Lydick E, Cook K, Turpin J et al. (1998) Development and validation of a simple questionnaire to facilitate identification of women likely to have low bone density. Am J Manag Care 4:37–48PubMed Lydick E, Cook K, Turpin J et al. (1998) Development and validation of a simple questionnaire to facilitate identification of women likely to have low bone density. Am J Manag Care 4:37–48PubMed
14.
go back to reference Weinstein L, Ullery B (2000) Identification of at-risk women for osteoporosis screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:547–549 Weinstein L, Ullery B (2000) Identification of at-risk women for osteoporosis screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:547–549
15.
go back to reference Geusens P, Hochberg MC, van der Voort DJM et al. (2002) Performance of risk indices for identifying low bone density in postmenopausal women. Mayo Clin Proc 77:629–637PubMed Geusens P, Hochberg MC, van der Voort DJM et al. (2002) Performance of risk indices for identifying low bone density in postmenopausal women. Mayo Clin Proc 77:629–637PubMed
16.
go back to reference Fujiwara S, Masunari N, Suzuki G, Ross PD (2001) Performance of osteoporosis risk indices in a Japanese population. Curr Ther Res 62:586–594CrossRef Fujiwara S, Masunari N, Suzuki G, Ross PD (2001) Performance of osteoporosis risk indices in a Japanese population. Curr Ther Res 62:586–594CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Murray TM et al. (2001) Evaluation of decision rules for referring women for bone densitometry by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. JAMA 286:57–63CrossRefPubMed Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Murray TM et al. (2001) Evaluation of decision rules for referring women for bone densitometry by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. JAMA 286:57–63CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference National Osteoporosis Foundation (2003) Physician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington D.C. National Osteoporosis Foundation (2003) Physician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington D.C.
19.
go back to reference World Health Organization (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. WHO, Geneva World Health Organization (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. WHO, Geneva
20.
go back to reference Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (1994) The Canadian guide to clinical preventive health care. Minister of Supply & Services Canada, Ottawa Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (1994) The Canadian guide to clinical preventive health care. Minister of Supply & Services Canada, Ottawa
21.
go back to reference NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy (2001) Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. JAMA 285:785–795PubMed NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy (2001) Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. JAMA 285:785–795PubMed
22.
go back to reference American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice (2002) Bone density screening for osteoporosis. Obstet Gynecol 99:523–525CrossRefPubMed American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice (2002) Bone density screening for osteoporosis. Obstet Gynecol 99:523–525CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Cummings SR, Bates D, Black DM (2002) Clinical use of bone densitometry: scientific review. JAMA 288:1889–1897CrossRefPubMed Cummings SR, Bates D, Black DM (2002) Clinical use of bone densitometry: scientific review. JAMA 288:1889–1897CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Jaglal SB, Carrol J, Hawker G et al. (2003) How are family physicians managing osteoporosis? Qualitative study of their experiences and educational needs. Can Fam Phy 49:462–468 Jaglal SB, Carrol J, Hawker G et al. (2003) How are family physicians managing osteoporosis? Qualitative study of their experiences and educational needs. Can Fam Phy 49:462–468
25.
go back to reference Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes RB (1995) Changing physician performance: a systematic review of continuing medical education strategies. JAMA 274:700–705CrossRefPubMed Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes RB (1995) Changing physician performance: a systematic review of continuing medical education strategies. JAMA 274:700–705CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Williams MI, Petkov VI, Johnson SL et al. (2003) Applying the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) in primary care practices uncovers osteoporosis in men: Preliminary report [abstract]. J Bone Miner Res 18:s154 Williams MI, Petkov VI, Johnson SL et al. (2003) Applying the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) in primary care practices uncovers osteoporosis in men: Preliminary report [abstract]. J Bone Miner Res 18:s154
27.
go back to reference Adler RA, Tran MT, Petkov VI (2003) Performance of the osteoporosis self-assessment screening tool for osteoporosis in American men. Mayo Clin Proc 78:723–727PubMed Adler RA, Tran MT, Petkov VI (2003) Performance of the osteoporosis self-assessment screening tool for osteoporosis in American men. Mayo Clin Proc 78:723–727PubMed
28.
go back to reference Hochberg MC, Tracy JK, van der Klift M, Pols H (2002) Validation of a risk index to identify men with an increased likelihood of osteoporosis (abstract). J Bone Miner Res 17:s231 Hochberg MC, Tracy JK, van der Klift M, Pols H (2002) Validation of a risk index to identify men with an increased likelihood of osteoporosis (abstract). J Bone Miner Res 17:s231
29.
go back to reference Kmetic A, Joseph L, Berger C, Tenenhouse A (2002) Multiple imputation to account for missing data in a survey: estimating the prevalence of osteoporosis. Epidemiology 13:437–444CrossRefPubMed Kmetic A, Joseph L, Berger C, Tenenhouse A (2002) Multiple imputation to account for missing data in a survey: estimating the prevalence of osteoporosis. Epidemiology 13:437–444CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Ross PD (1997) Clinical consequences of vertebral fractures. Am J Med 103:30s–43sPubMed Ross PD (1997) Clinical consequences of vertebral fractures. Am J Med 103:30s–43sPubMed
31.
go back to reference Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Wagner EH (1996) Clinical epidemiology: the essentials, 3rd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Wagner EH (1996) Clinical epidemiology: the essentials, 3rd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore
32.
go back to reference Laupacis A, Sekar N, Stiell IG (1997) Clinical prediction rules: a review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 277:488–494CrossRefPubMed Laupacis A, Sekar N, Stiell IG (1997) Clinical prediction rules: a review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 277:488–494CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The validity of decision rules for selecting women with primary osteoporosis for bone mineral density testing
Authors
Suzanne M. Cadarette
Warren J. McIsaac
Gillian A. Hawker
Liisa Jaakkimainen
Alison Culbert
Gihane Zarifa
Ebele Ola
Susan B. Jaglal
Publication date
01-05-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Osteoporosis International / Issue 5/2004
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-003-1552-7

Other articles of this Issue 5/2004

Osteoporosis International 5/2004 Go to the issue