Imminent risk of fracture after fracture

The risk of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) after a first MOF is increased over the whole duration of follow-up, but the imminent risk is even higher. If the acute increment in risk in the few years following MOF is amenable to therapeutic intervention, then immediate short-term treatments may provide worthwhile clinical dividends in a very cost-effective manner.

INTRODUCTION

A history of fracture is a strong risk factor for future fractures. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the predictive value of a past MOF for future MOF changed with time.

METHODS

The study was based on a population-based cohort of 18,872 men and women born between 1907 and 1935. Fractures were documented over 510,265 person-years. An extension of Poisson regression was used to investigate the relationship between the first MOF and the second. All associations were adjusted for age and time since baseline.

RESULTS

Five thousand thirty-nine individuals sustained one or more MOFs, of whom 1919 experienced a second MOF. The risk of a second MOF after a first increased by 4% for each year of age (95% CI 1.02-1.06) and was 41% higher for women than men (95% CI 1.25-1.59). The risk of a second MOF was highest immediately after the first fracture and thereafter decreased with time though remained higher than the population risk throughout follow-up. For example, 1 year after the first MOF, the risk of a second fracture was 2.7 (2.4-3.0) fold higher than the population risk. After 10 years, this risk ratio was 1.4 (1.2-1.6). The effect was more marked with increasing age.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of MOF after a first MOF is increased over the whole follow-up, but the imminent risk is even higher. If the acute increment in risk in the few years following MOF is amenable to therapeutic intervention, then immediate short-term treatments may provide worthwhile clinical dividends in a very cost-effective manner, particularly in the elderly.

The timed 'Up & Go' is dependent on chair type

INTRODUCTION

The timed 'Up & Go' (TUG) is a performance test identifying problems in functional mobility. More knowledge on how the type of chair used influences test results is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate inter-rater agreement on the time score and to assess if chair type used influenced the performance of the test.

SETTING

(1) Inter-rater agreement investigation on the time score was carried out with elderly individuals living in a retirement home (n = 31). (2) Four types of chairs were tested on elderly individuals in three different health care centres (n = 100).

RESULTS

The two observers were close in timing (mean difference = 0.04 s). From a reference chair the median time for TUG was 15.7 s compared with 16.9 s from a chair with a low seat (p < 0.001). It was significantly more difficult to stand up from a chair without armrests (p < 0.001), and from the lowest chair (p < 0.001), which was also the only chair difficult to sit down on (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The inter-rater agreement of the time scoring of the TUG has been confirmed. Test performance is dependent on chair type; chairs with armrests and a seating height of 44-47 cm should be used. Clinicians must follow standard procedures and equipment when using the test or else risk invalidating test findings.