The yield of routine laboratory examination in osteoporosis evaluation in primary care.

This study evaluated the yield of routine laboratory examination in a large population of older women in primary care. The prevalence of laboratory abnormalities was low and the clinical consequences in follow-up were limited. There was a weak association of laboratory abnormalities with osteoporosis but no association with vertebral fractures and recent fractures. PURPOSE: Most osteoporosis guidelines advice routine laboratory examination. We have investigated the yield of laboratory examinations in facture risk evaluation of elderly women in primary care. METHODS: We assessed the prevalence of laboratory abnormalities and their association with risk factors for fractures, recent fractures, low bone mineral density (BMD), and prevalent vertebral fracture in 8996 women ≥ 65 years of age participating in a primary care fracture risk screening study. In a sample of 2208 of these participants, we also evaluated the medical consequences in the medical records during a follow-up period of ≥ 1 year. RESULTS: Vitamin D deficiency (< 30 nmol/L) was present in 13% and insufficiency (< 50 nmol/L) in 43% of the study sample. The prevalence of other laboratory abnormalities (ESR, calcium, creatinine, FT4) was 4.6% in women with risk factors for fractures, 6.1% in women with low BMD (T-score ≤ - 2.5), 6.0% after a prevalent vertebral fracture, 5.2% after a recent fracture and 2.6% in the absence of important risk factors for fractures. Laboratory abnormalities other than vitamin D were associated with low BMD (OR 1.4, 95%CI 1.1-1.8) but not with prevalent vertebral fractures nor recent fractures. Low BMD was associated with renal failure (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.3-3.4), vitamin D insufficiency (OR 1.2, 95%CI 1.0-1.3) and deficiency (OR 1.3, 95%CI 1.1-.5). In the follow-up period, 82% of the laboratory abnormalities did not result in a new diagnosis or treatment reported in the medical records. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a low prevalence of laboratory abnormalities in a primary care population of older women and the majority of these findings had no medical consequences.

The Effect of a Screening and Treatment Program for the Prevention of Fractures in Older Women: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial.

Population screening for fracture risk may reduce the fracture incidence. In this randomized pragmatic trial, the SALT Osteoporosis Study (SOS), we studied whether screening for fracture risk and subsequent treatment in primary care can reduce fractures compared with usual care. A total of 11,032 women aged 65 to 90 years with ≥1 clinical risk factor for fractures were individually randomized to screening (n = 5575) or usual care (n = 5457). Participants in the screening group underwent a screening program, including bone densitometry and vertebral fracture assessment. Participants with a high 10-year fracture probability (FRAX) or a vertebral fracture were offered treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication by their general practitioner. Incident fractures as reported by questionnaires were verified with medical records. Follow-up was completed by 94% of the participants (mean follow-up = 3.7 years). Of the 5575 participants in the screening group, 1417 (25.4%) had an indication for anti-osteoporosis medication. Screening and subsequent treatment had no statistically significant effect on the primary outcome fracture (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.08), nor on the secondary outcomes osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.81-1.03), major osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.80-1.04), hip fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.71-1.15), falls (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% CI 0.72-1.15), or mortality (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.91-1.17). Post hoc explorative finding suggested that screening might be most effective after a recent fracture (HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96 for major osteoporotic fractures and HR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.79 for hip fractures). The results of this study might have been compromised by nonparticipation and medication nonadherence in the screening group. Overall, this study does not provide sufficient indications to consider screening for fracture prevention. However, we cannot exclude its clinical relevance to reduce (major) osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures because of the relatively small number of women with a treatment indication in the intervention group. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.