Validation of the osteoporosis self-assessment tool in US male veterans

Screening for Osteoporosis Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Due to potential health-related consequences of osteoporosis (OP), health care providers who do not order imaging, such as physical therapists, should be aware of OP screening tools that identify individuals who need medical and rehabilitation care. However, current knowledge and guidance on screening tools is limited. Therefore, we explored OP screening tools that are appropriate and feasible for physical therapy practice, and evaluated tools' effectiveness by examining their clinimetric properties.

METHODS

A systematic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, PEDro, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Articles were included if the study population was 50 years and older, had a diagnosis of OP, if the screening tool was within the scope of physical therapy practice, and was compared to either a known diagnosis of OP or bone densitometry scan results. Included articles underwent multiple reviews for inclusion and exclusion, with each review round having a different randomly selected pair of reviewers. Data were extracted from included articles for participant demographics, outcome measures, cut-off values, and clinimetric properties. Results were categorized with positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) based on the magnitude of change in the probability of having or not having OP.

RESULTS

+LRs ranged from 0.15 to 20.21, with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) having a large shift in posttest probability. -LRs ranged from 0.03 to 1.00, with the FRAX, Male Osteoporosis Risk Estimation Scores, Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), and Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation having a large shift in posttest probability.

CONCLUSION

Tools with moderate-large shift for both +LR and -LR recommended for use are: (1) OST; (2) FRAX; and (3) SOF. The variability in cut-off scores and clinimetric properties based on gender, age, and race/ethnicities made it impossible to provide one specific recommendation for an OP screening tool. Future research should focus on OP risk prediction among males and racial and ethnic groups.

Engagement in Primary Prevention Program among Rural Veterans With Osteoporosis Risk

A primary osteoporosis prevention program using a virtual bone health team (BHT) was implemented to comanage the care of rural veterans in the Mountain West region of the United States. The BHT identified, screened, and treated rural veterans at risk for osteoporosis using telephone and United States Postal Service communications. Eligibility was determined by regular use of Veterans Health Administration primary care, age 50 or older, and evidence of fracture risk. This study was conducted to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with the acceptance of osteoporosis screening and the initiation of medication where indicated. A cross-sectional cohort design (N = 6985) was utilized with a generalized estimating equation and logit link function to account for facility-level clustering. Fully saturated and reduced models were fitted using backward selection. Less than a quarter of eligible veterans enrolled in BHT's program and completed screening. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of clinic enrollment included being of older age, unmarried, greater distance from VHA services, having a copayment, prior fracture, or history of rheumatoid arthritis. A majority of veterans with treatment indication started medication therapy (N = 453). In this subpopulation, Fisher's exact test showed a significant association between osteoporosis treatment uptake and a history of two or more falls in the prior year, self-reported parental history of fracture, current smoking, and weight-bearing exercise. The BHT was designed to reduce barriers to screening; however, for this population cost and travel continue to limit engagement. The remarkable rate of medication initiation notwithstanding, low enrollment reduces the impact of this primary prevention program, and findings pertaining to fracture, smoking, and exercise imply that health beliefs are an important contributing factor. Efforts to identify and address barriers to osteoporosis screening and treatment, such as clinical factors, social determinants of health, and health beliefs, may pave the way for effective implementation of population bone health care delivery systems. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Simple Self-Assessment Tool to Predict Osteoporosis in Taiwanese Men

Background: Although the self-assessment tools for predicting osteoporosis are convenient for clinicians, they are not commonly used among men. We developed the Male Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Taiwan (MOSTAi) to identify the patients at risk of osteoporosis. Methods: All the participants completed a questionnaire on the clinical risk factors for the fracture risk assessment tool. The risk index was calculated by the multivariate regression model through the item reduction method. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze its sensitivity and specificity, and MOSTAi was developed and validated. Results: A total of 2,290 men participated in the bone mineral density (BMD) survey. We chose a model that considered two variables (age and weight). The area under the curve (AUC) of the model was 0.700. The formula for the MOSTAi index is as follows: 0.3 × (weight in kilograms) - 0.1 × (years). We chose 11 as the appropriate cut-off value for the MOSTAi index to identify the subjects at the risk of osteoporosis. Conclusions: The MOSTAi is a simple, intuitive, and country-specific tool that can predict the risk of osteoporosis in Taiwanese men. Due to different demographic characteristics, each region of the world can develop its own model to identify patients with osteoporosis more effectively.

Protocol for the models of primary osteoporosis screening in men (MOPS) cluster randomized trial

Current guidelines recommend primary osteoporosis screening for at-risk men to reduce the morbidity, mortality, and cost associated with osteoporotic fractures. However, analyses in a national Veterans Health Administration cohort of over 4,000,000 men demonstrated that primary osteoporosis screening as it is currently operationalized does not benefit most older Veterans due to inefficient targeting and low subsequent treatment and adherence rates. The overall objective of this study is to determine whether a new model of primary osteoporosis screening reduces fracture risk compared to usual care. We are conducting a pragmatic group randomized trial of 38 primary care teams assigned to usual care or a Bone Health Service (BHS) screening model in which screening and adherence activities are managed by a centralized expert team. The study will: 1) compare the impact of the BHS model on patient-level outcomes strongly associated with fracture rates (eligible proportion screened, proportion meeting treatment criteria who receive osteoporosis medications, medication adherence, and femoral neck bone mineral density); 2) quantify the impact on provider and facility-level outcomes including change in DXA volume, change in metabolic bone disease clinic volume, and PACT provider time and satisfaction; and 3) estimate the impact on health system and policy outcomes using Markov models of screening program cost per quality adjusted life year based from health system and societal perspectives.

High prevalence of vertebral fractures in seizure patients with normal bone density receiving chronic anti-epileptic drugs

People with epilepsy who take certain medications are at risk for developing osteoporosis and fractures of the vertebrae that commonly go undiagnosed. By using technology available in a bone density scan, we observed at least one fracture in many subjects with bone density in the normal and osteopenic range.

PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION

Chronic use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), both enzyme-inducing (phenytoin, phenobarbital, carbamazepine, and primidone) and non-enzyme-inducing (i.e., valproate), is recognized as a cause of secondary osteoporosis. Vertebral compression fractures (VF) are the most common type of osteoporotic fractures and may confer an increased risk of future hip, wrist, and vertebral fractures. Vertebral compression fractures in the general population are frequently asymptomatic, and under-diagnosed. The purpose of this study is to describe the prevalence of VF in a cohort of male veterans with epilepsy on chronic AEDs.

METHODS

The cohort for this study consisted of 146 male veterans who carried a diagnosis of epilepsy and were chronic users of AEDs known to cause osteoporosis (phenobarbital, phenytoin, carbamazepine, primidone, and valproate). Chronic AED use was defined as receiving an AED for at least 2 years. Subjects were previously seen in the osteoporosis clinic and had been evaluated by a dual-energy X-Ray absormetry (DXA) instrument including morphometric studies following a standard vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) protocol during the same DXA imaging acquisition session.

RESULTS

The mean age was 63 years. Low bone mineral density defined as osteoporosis or osteopenia was observed in 29% and 43% respectively. We observed at least one VF in 41 % of the subjects who had normal BMD, 54% in the osteopenic range, and 75% in the osteoporotic range.

CONCLUSIONS

By performing a VFA in addition to standard bone densitometric studies, we disclosed a large prevalence of compression fractures in individuals with epilepsy chronically treated with AEDs who had BMDs in the normal and osteopenic ranges. The addition of VFA or other imaging methods to evaluate VF should be included in the evaluation of bone health in individuals with epilepsy receiving AEDs since it may modify treatment recommendations to prevent future osteoporotic fractures.

Delivering fracture prevention services to rural US veterans through telemedicine: a process evaluation

An informatics-driven population bone health clinic was implemented to identify, screen, and treat rural US Veterans at risk for osteoporosis. We report the results of our implementation process evaluation which demonstrated BHT to be a feasible telehealth model for delivering preventative osteoporosis services in this setting.

PURPOSE

An established and growing quality gap in osteoporosis evaluation and treatment of at-risk patients has yet to be met with corresponding clinical care models addressing osteoporosis primary prevention. The rural bone health tea m (BHT) was implemented to identify, screen, and treat rural Veterans lacking evidence of bone health care and we conducted a process evaluation to understand BHT implementation feasibility.

METHODS

For this evaluation, we defined the primary outcome as the number of Veterans evaluated with DXA and a secondary outcome as the number of Veterans who initiated prescription therapy to reduce fracture risk. Outcomes were measured over a 15-month period and analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data to understand successful implementation were collected concurrently by conducting interviews with clinical personnel interacting with BHT and BHT staff and observations of BHT implementation processes at three site visits using the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework.

RESULTS

Of 4500 at-risk, rural Veterans offered osteoporosis screening, 1081 (24%) completed screening, and of these, 37% had normal bone density, 48% osteopenia, and 15% osteoporosis. Among Veterans with pharmacotherapy indications, 90% initiated therapy. Qualitative analyses identified barriers of rural geography, rural population characteristics, and the infrastructural resource requirement. Data infrastructure, evidence base for care delivery, stakeholder buy-in, formal and informal facilitator engagement, and focus on teamwork were identified as facilitators of implementation success.

CONCLUSION

The BHT is a feasible population telehealth model for delivering preventative osteoporosis care to rural Veterans.

Comparison of the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians and the fracture risk assessment tool - FRAX to identify densitometric defined osteoporosis: A discriminatory value analysis in a multi-ethnic female population in Southeast Asia

Objectives

The accuracy of FRAX® as a screening tool to identify osteoporosis and how it compares with tools such as Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA), in Southeast Asian women has so far been unexplored. We aimed to determine the FRAX® thresholds that accurately identify densitometric osteoporosis and to compare its performance with that of OSTA for this purpose.

Methods

Singaporean postmenopausal women (n = 1056) were evaluated. FRAX® Major Osteoporotic Fracture Probability (MOFP), Hip Fracture Probability (HFP) scores, and OSTA indices were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed and via the Youden index, the optimal cut-off points of balanced sensitivity and specificity for dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-defined osteoporosis were identified and the performance characteristics were compared.

Results

A FRAX® MOFP threshold of ≥3.7% had sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 0.78 (0.73–0.83), 0.63 (0.59–0.66), 0.4 (0.36–0.44), and 0.9 (0.87–0.92), respectively in identifying osteoporosis. The corresponding values for a HFP threshold of ≥0.6% were 0.85 (0.80–0.89), 0.58 (0.55–0.62), 0.39 (0.35–0.43), and 0.92 (0.9–0.94) and that for an OSTA index cut-off of ≤ −1.2 were 0.76 (0.70–0.81), 0.74 (0.71–0.77), 0.48 (0.43–0.54), and 0.91 (0.88–0.93). The area under the ROC curves were 82.8% (79.9%–85.6%), 77.6% (74.2%–81%), and 79.6% (76.5%–82.8%) for OSTA, MOFP, and HFP thresholds respectively.

Conclusions

FRAX® and OSTA perform comparably in identifying osteoporosis in our population. OSTA has only 2 parameters and may be simpler to use. However, FRAX® may also have a role in primary screening to identify the postmenopausal woman to be referred for DXA scanning and may help facilitate fracture risk reduction discussions with the patient.

The performance of osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) in identifying the risk of osteoporosis among Malaysian population aged 40 years and above

The concordance between osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was fair in the study. Modification of OSTA cutoff values improved its sensitivity to identify subjects at risk for suboptimal bone health (osteopenia/osteoporosis) and osteoporosis.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) is a convenient screening algorithm used widely to identify patients at risk of osteoporosis. Currently, the number of studies validating OSTA in Malaysian population is limited. This study aimed to validate the performance of OSTA in identifying subjects with osteoporosis determined with DXA.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study recruited 786 Malaysians in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Their bone health status was assessed by DXA and OSTA. The association and agreement between OSTA and bone mineral density assessment by DXA were determined by Pearson's correlation and Cohen's kappa, respectively. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were used to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for OSTA.

RESULTS

OSTA and DXA showed a fair association in the study (r = 0.382, κ = 0.159, p < 0.001). OSTA (cutoff < - 1) revealed a sensitivity of 32.3%, specificity of 92.3%, and AUC of 0.618 in identifying subjects with suboptimal bone health. The sensitivity of OSTA (cutoff < - 4) in determining subjects at risk of osteoporosis was better among women (sensitivity = 20%) than men (sensitivity = 0%). Modified OSTA cutoff values improved the sensitivity of OSTA in identifying subjects with suboptimal bone health (men = 81.0% at cutoff 3.4, women = 82.8% at cutoff 2.0) and osteoporosis (men = 81.8% at cutoff 1.8, women = 81.3% at cutoff 0.8).

CONCLUSION

OSTA with its original cutoff values is ineffective in identifying individuals at risk for osteoporosis. Adjusting the cutoff values significantly increases the sensitivity of OSTA, thus highlighting the need to validate this instrument among the local population before using it for osteoporosis screening clinically.

Performance of Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) in Predicting Osteoporosis-A Review

Bone health screening plays a vital role in the early diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis to prevent fragility fractures among the elderly and high-risk individuals. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which detects bone mineral density, is the gold standard in diagnosing osteoporosis but is not suitable for screening. Therefore, many screening tools have been developed to identify individuals at risk for osteoporosis and prioritize them for DXA scanning. The Osteoporosis Self-assessment Tool (OST) is among the first tools established to predict osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. It can identify the population at risk for osteoporosis, but its performance varies according to ethnicity, gender, and age. Thus, these factors should be considered to ensure the optimal use of OST worldwide. Overall, OST is a simple and economical screening tool to predict osteoporosis and it can help to optimize the use of DXA.

Comparison of three tools for predicting primary osteoporosis in an elderly male population in Beijing: a cross-sectional study

Purpose

In this cross-sectional study, three clinical tools, the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA), Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) without bone mineral density (BMD), and body mass index (BMI), for predicting primary osteoporosis (OP) were compared and ideal thresholds for omission of screening BMD were proposed in a community-dwelling elderly Han Beijing male population.

Patients and methods

A total of 1,349 community-dwelling elderly Han Beijing males aged ≥50 years were enrolled in this study. All subjects completed a questionnaire and measured BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporosis was defined as a T-score of -2.5 SD or lower than that of the average young adult in different diagnostic criteria (lumbar spine [L1-L4], femoral neck, total hip, worst hip, and World Health Organization [WHO]). FRAX without BMD, OSTA, and BMI were assessed for predicting OP by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Sensitivity, specificity, and areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) were determined. Ideal thresholds for omission of screening BMD were proposed.

Results

The prevalence of OP ranged from 1.8% to 12.8% according to different diagnostic criteria. This study showed that the BMI has highest discriminating ability. The AUC of FRAX without BMD ranged from 0.536 to 0.630, which suggested limiting predictive value for identifying OP in elderly Beijing male. The AUCs of BMI (0.801-0.880) were slightly better than OSTA (0.722-0.874) in predicting OP at all sites. The AUC of BMI to identify OP in worst hip was 0.824, yielding a sensitivity of 84.8% and a specificity of 64.4%. 40% of participants on BMD measurements saved only 0.1%-2.7% missed OP. Compared to OSTA and FRAX without BMD, the BMI got the best predictive value for OP.

Conclusion

BMI may be a simple and effective tool for identifying OP in the elderly male population in Beijing to omit BMD screening reasonably.

Performance of risk assessment tools for predicting osteoporosis in south Indian rural elderly men

Osteoporosis in elderly men is an under-recognized problem. In the current study, we intend to look at the performance of two risk assessment tools [OSTA and MORES] for the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis was seen in 1/4th of elderly men at spine and 1/6th of them at femoral neck. Both risk assessment tools were found to have good sensitivity in predicting osteoporosis at spine and femoral neck with good area under curve (AUC).

PURPOSE

This study attempts to look at the performance of osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and male osteoporosis risk estimation score (MORES) for predicting osteoporosis in south Indian rural elderly men.

METHODS

Five hundred and twelve men above 65 years of age from a south Indian rural community were recruited by cluster random sampling. All subjects underwent detailed clinical, anthropometric, and bone mineral density measurement at lumbar spine and femoral neck using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan. A T score ≤ - 2.5 was diagnostic of osteoporosis. Scores for OSTA and MORES were calculated at various cut offs, and their sensitivities and specificities for predicting osteoporosis were derived.

RESULTS

The prevalence of osteoporosis was found to be 16% at femoral neck and 23% at spine. OSTA with a cut-off value of ≤2 predicted osteoporosis with a sensitivity and specificity at lumbar spine of 94 and 17% and at femoral neck of 99 and 18%. The area under ROC curve for OSTA index for spine was 0.716 and for femoral neck was 0.778. MORES with a cut-off value of ≥6 predicted osteoporosis at spine with a sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 15%, and at femoral neck, they were 98 and 13%, respectively. The area under ROC curve for MORES for spine was 0.855 and for femoral neck was 0.760.

CONCLUSION

OSTA and MORES were found to be useful screening tools for predicting osteoporosis in Indian elderly men. These tools are simple, easy to perform, and cost effective in the context of rural Indian setting.

A comparison of electronic and manual fracture risk assessment tools in screening elderly male US veterans at risk for osteoporosis

This study compares four screening tools in their ability to predict osteoporosis. We found that there was no significant difference between the tools. These results provide support for the use of automated screening tools which work in conjunction with the electronic medical record and help improve screening rates for osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of four fracture risk assessment tools (FRATs) in identifying osteoporosis by bone mineral density (BMD) T-score: Veterans Affairs Fracture Absolute Risk Assessment Tool (VA-FARA), World Health Organization's Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), electronic FRAX (e-FRAX), and Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Screening Tool (OST).

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of all patients enrolled in the VA Salt Lake City bone health team (BHT) who had completed a DXA scan between February 1, 2012, and February 1, 2013. DXA scan results were obtained by chart abstraction. For calculation of FRAX, osteoporosis risk factors were obtained from a screening questionnaire completed prior to DXA. For VA-FARA and e-FRAX, risk factors were derived from the electronic medical record (EMR). Clinical risk scores were calculated and compared against the gold standard of DXA-based osteoporosis. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted, and areas under the curve (AUC) were compared.

RESULTS

A cohort of 463 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age 80.4 years). One hundred twelve patients (24%) had osteoporosis as defined by DXA T-score ≤-2.5. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated. ROC statistics were compared and did not reach statistical significance difference between FRATs in identifying DXA-based osteoporosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that all FRATs tested perform similarly in identifying osteoporosis among elderly, primarily Caucasian, male veterans. If these electronic screening methods perform similarly for fracture outcomes, they could replace manual FRAX and thus improve efficiency in identifying individuals who should be sent for DXA scan.

Screening for Osteoporosis in Older Men: Operating Characteristics of Proposed Strategies for Selecting Men for BMD Testing

BACKGROUND

The optimal approach for selecting men for bone mineral density (BMD) testing to screen for osteoporosis is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To compare strategies for selecting older men for screening BMD testing.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 4043 community-dwelling men aged ≥70 years at four US sites.

MAIN MEASURES

BMD at the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) without BMD to discriminate between those with and without osteoporosis as defined by World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic criteria, and between those recommended and not recommended for pharmacologic therapy based on the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) guidelines.

KEY RESULTS

Among the cohort, 216 (5.3%) had a BMD T-score ≤ -2.5 at the femoral neck, total hip, or lumbar spine, and 1184 (29.2%) met criteria for consideration of pharmacologic therapy according to NOF guidelines. The OST had better discrimination (AUC 0.68) than the FRAX (AUC 0.62; p = 0.004) for identifying T-score-defined osteoporosis. Use of an OST threshold of <2 resulted in sensitivity of 0.83 and specificity of 0.36 for the identification of osteoporosis, compared to sensitivity of 0.59 and specificity of 0.59 for the use of FRAX with a cutoff of 9.3% 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

The OST performs modestly better than the more complex FRAX in selecting older men for BMD testing to screen for osteoporosis; the use of either tool substantially reduces the proportion of men referred for BMD testing compared to universal screening. Of 1000 men aged 70 and older in this community-based cohort, the use of an OST cutoff of <2 to select men for BMD testing would result in 654 men referred for BMD testing, of whom 44 would be identified as having osteoporosis, and nine with osteoporosis would be missed.

Utility of Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool as a Screening Tool for Predicting Osteoporosis in Indian Men

The osteoporosis self-assessment tool (OSTA) predicts the risk of osteoporosis in an individual. It is a simple calculation-based tool [wt (kg) - age (yr)/5] and can be used for measuring bone mineral density (BMD). However, OSTA is influenced by ethnicity. We studied the performance of OSTA index as a screening tool for osteoporosis in 257 community-dwelling North Indian men above 50 yr age. Each subject underwent a detailed clinical, dietary, anthropometric, and biochemical assessment and bone density measurement using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. As per World Health Organization criteria, osteoporosis, osteopenia, and normal BMD were observed in 17.9%, 58.8%, and 23.3%, respectively. OSTA index ranged between -6.4 and 8.8. OST index ≤2 predicted osteoporosis with a sensitivity of 95.7% and a specificity of 33.6% and an area under the curve for a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.702. The OSTA index is an effective screening tool for measuring BMD in elderly Indian men and can be used by primary care physicians.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for osteoporosis or low bone density

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for DXA-determined osteoporosis or low bone density. Commonly evaluated risk instruments showed high sensitivity approaching or exceeding 90% at particular thresholds within various populations but low specificity at thresholds required for high sensitivity. Simpler instruments, such as OST, generally performed as well as or better than more complex instruments.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the study is to systematically review the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-determined osteoporosis or low bone density.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Multiple literature sources were searched, and data extracted and analyzed from included references.

RESULTS

One hundred eight references met inclusion criteria. Studies assessed many instruments in 34 countries, most commonly the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST), the Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation (SCORE) instrument, the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA), the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI), and body weight criteria. Meta-analyses of studies evaluating OST using a cutoff threshold of <1 to identify US postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at the femoral neck provided summary sensitivity and specificity estimates of 89% (95%CI 82-96%) and 41% (95%CI 23-59%), respectively. Meta-analyses of studies evaluating OST using a cutoff threshold of 3 to identify US men with osteoporosis at the femoral neck, total hip, or lumbar spine provided summary sensitivity and specificity estimates of 88% (95%CI 79-97%) and 55% (95%CI 42-68%), respectively. Frequently evaluated instruments each had thresholds and populations for which sensitivity for osteoporosis or low bone mass detection approached or exceeded 90% but always with a trade-off of relatively low specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Commonly evaluated clinical risk assessment instruments each showed high sensitivity approaching or exceeding 90% for identifying individuals with DXA-determined osteoporosis or low BMD at certain thresholds in different populations but low specificity at thresholds required for high sensitivity. Simpler instruments, such as OST, generally performed as well as or better than more complex instruments.