• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Mon, 15.07.24

Search results

December 2018
Raviv Allon BsC, Yahav Levy MD, Idit Lavi MA, Aviv Kramer MD, Menashe Barzilai MD and Ronit Wollstein MD

Because fragility fractures have an enormous impact on the practice of medicine and global health systems, effective screening is imperative. Currently, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which has limited ability to predict fractures, is being used. We evaluated the current literature for a method that may constitute a better screening method to predict fragility fractures. A systematic review of the literature was conducted on computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and ultrasound to evaluate screening methods to predict fragility fractures. We found that ultrasound had sufficient data on fracture prediction to perform meta-analysis; therefore, we analyzed prospective ultrasound cohort studies. Six study populations, consisting of 29,299 individuals (87,296 person-years of observation) and including 992 fractures, were analyzed. MRI was found to be sensitive and specific for osteoporosis, but its use for screening has not been sufficiently evaluated and more research is needed on cost, accessibility, technical challenges, and sensitivity and specificity. CT could predict fracture occurrence; however, it may be problematic for screening due to cost, exposure to radiation, and availability. Ultrasound was found to predict fracture occurrence with an increased risk of 1.45 (95% confidence interval 1.21–1.73) to fracture. Ultrasound has not replaced DXA as a screening tool for osteoporosis, perhaps due to operator-dependency and difficulty in standardization of testing.

October 2013
R. Blecher, Z. Wasrbrout, Y. Arama, R. Kardosh, G. Agar and Y. Mirovsky
 Background: Osteoporosis is considered the most common bone disease in humans and the most common cause of fractures.

Objectives: To identify possible risk factors associated with a decreased level of care for osteoporosis among patients presenting acutely with the major types of fragility fractures, but also among patients who remain undertreated following their discharge.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective questionnaire-based cohort study. We searched our databases for patients admitted acutely with proximal humerus, distal forearm, thoracolumbar spine, and proximal femur fractures. A questionnaire was used to evaluate osteoporotic care including a referral to DEXA and any associated prescribed medication.

Results: The study group included 114 patients or their caregivers. The osteoporosis care rate rose from 56.1% (n=64) before admission to 71% (n=81) at follow-up. Significant risk factors associated with a decreased care rate prior to admission were the presence of fewer than three comorbidities, and a combination of male gender and young age. Continued neglect at follow-up was associated with the opposite risk factors, such as older age, multiple comorbidities, and polypharmacy. An additional finding was that treated patients had a significantly increased likelihood of presenting with vertebral fractures.

Conclusions: While the association of osteoporosis with the elderly may decrease its screening rates among younger and healthier patients, fragility fractures may be viewed as “end-stage” bone disease, rendering osteoporotic care inefficient.


Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel