학술논문

Comparison of fracture risk assessment tools in older men without prior hip or spine fracture: the MrOS study
Document Type
article
Source
Archives of Osteoporosis. 12(1)
Subject
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences
Clinical Sciences
Osteoporosis
Clinical Research
Aging
Physical Injury - Accidents and Adverse Effects
Injuries and accidents
Musculoskeletal
Aged
Aged
80 and over
Bone Density
Calibration
Femur Neck
Hip Fractures
Humans
Male
Osteoporotic Fractures
Predictive Value of Tests
ROC Curve
Risk Assessment
Spinal Fractures
Bone density
Fractures
Risk assessment
Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study Group
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Clinical sciences
Language
Abstract
Femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), age plus femoral neck BMD T score, and three externally generated fracture risk tools had similar accuracy to identify older men who developed osteoporotic fractures. Risk tools with femoral neck BMD performed better than those without BMD. The externally developed risk tools were poorly calibrated.IntroductionWe compared the performance of fracture risk assessment tools in older men, accounting for competing risks including mortality.MethodsA comparative ROC curve analysis assessed the ability of the QFracture, FRAX® and Garvan fracture risk tools, and femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) T score with or without age to identify incident fracture in community-dwelling men aged 65 years or older (N = 4994) without hip or clinical vertebral fracture or antifracture treatment at baseline.ResultsAmong risk tools calculated with BMD, the discriminative ability to identify men with incident hip fracture was similar for FRAX (AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.73, 0.81), the Garvan tool (AUC 0.78, 95% CI 0.74, 0.82), age plus femoral neck BMD T score (AUC 0.79, 95% CI 0.75, 0.83), and femoral neck BMD T score alone (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.72, 0.81). Among risk tools calculated without BMD, the discriminative ability to identify hip fracture was similar for QFracture (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.66, 0.73), FRAX (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.66, 0.73), and the Garvan tool (AUC 0.71, 95% CI 0.67, 0.74). Correlated ROC curve analyses revealed better diagnostic accuracy for risk scores calculated with BMD compared with QFracture (P