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

被引:77
作者
Cadarette, SM
McIsaac, WJ
Hawker, GA
Jaakkimainen, L
Culbert, A
Zarifa, G
Ola, E
Jaglal, SB
机构
[1] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll Hlth Sci Ctr, Womens Coll Ambulatory Care Ctr, Osteoporosis Res Program, Toronto, ON M5S 1B2, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Family & Community Med, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[4] Mt Sinai Family Med Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll Hlth Sci Ctr, Womens Coll Ambulatory Care Ctr, Div Rheumatol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Family & Community Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[8] Univ Toronto, Grad Dept Rehabil Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
decision aids; osteoporosis; screening; sensitivity; specificity; women;
D O I
10.1007/s00198-003-1552-7
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:361 / 366
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Performance of the osteoporosis self-assessment screening tool for osteoporosis in American men [J].
Adler, RA ;
Tran, MT ;
Petkov, VI .
MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS, 2003, 78 (06) :723-727
[2]  
*AM COLL OBST GYN, 2002, OBSTET GYNECOL, V99, P523
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1994, ASS FRACT RISK ITS A
[4]   Clinical use of bone densitometry - Clinical applications [J].
Bates, DW ;
Black, DM ;
Cummings, SR .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 288 (15) :1898-1900
[5]   Screening for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: Recommendations and rationale [J].
Berg, AO ;
Allan, JD ;
Frame, PS ;
Homer, CJ ;
Johnson, MS ;
Klein, JD ;
Lieu, TA ;
Mulrow, CD ;
Orleans, CT ;
Peipert, JF ;
Pender, NJ ;
Siu, AL ;
Teutsch, SM ;
Westhoff, C ;
Woolf, SH .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2002, 137 (06) :526-528
[6]  
Brown JP, 2002, CAN MED ASSOC J, V167, pS1
[7]  
Cadarette SM, 2000, CAN MED ASSOC J, V162, P1289
[8]   Evaluation of decision rules for referring women for bone densitometry by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [J].
Cadarette, SM ;
Jaglal, SB ;
Murray, TM ;
McIsaac, WJ ;
Joseph, L ;
Brown, JP .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 286 (01) :57-63
[9]  
*CAN TASK FORC PED, 1994, CAN GUID CLIN PREV H
[10]   Clinical use of bone densitometry - Scientific review [J].
Cummings, SR ;
Bates, D ;
Black, DM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 288 (15) :1889-1897