Economic and Humanistic Burden Among Medicare-Aged Women With Fragility Fracture in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Describe patient characteristics, health care resource utilization, costs, and humanistic burden of women with Medicare insurance with incident fragility fracture who were admitted to post-acute-care (PAC). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using 100% Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling female Medicare beneficiaries with incident fragility fracture January 1, 2017, to October 17, 2019, resulting in PAC admission to a skilled nursing facility (SNF), home-health care, inpatient-rehabilitation facility, or long-term acute-care hospital. METHODS: Patient demographic/clinical characteristics were measured during 1-year baseline. Resource utilization and costs were measured during baseline, PAC event, and PAC follow-up. Humanistic burden was measured among SNF patients with linked Minimum Data Set assessments. Multivariable regression examined predictors of PAC costs after discharge and changes in functional status during SNF stay. RESULTS: A total of 388,732 patients were included. Compared with baseline, hospitalization rates were 3.5, 2.4, 2.6, and 3.1 times higher and total costs 2.7, 2.0, 2.5, and 3.6 times higher for SNF, home-health, inpatient-rehabilitation, and long-term acute-care, respectively, following PAC discharge. Utilization of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and osteoporosis medications remained low: 8.5% to 13.7% received DXA during baseline vs 5.2% to 15.6% following PAC; 10.2% to 12.0% received osteoporosis medication during baseline vs 11.4% to 22.3% following PAC. Dual eligibility for Medicaid (ie, low income) was associated with 12% higher costs; Black patients had 14% higher costs. Activities of daily living scores improved 3.5 points during SNF stay, but Black patients had 1.22-point lower improvement than White patients. Pain intensity scores showed small improvement (-0.8 points). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Women admitted to PAC with incident fracture had high humanistic burden with little improvement in pain and functional status and significantly higher economic burden after discharge compared with baseline. Disparities in outcomes related to social risk factors were observed, with consistently low utilization of DXA and osteoporosis medications even after fracture. Results indicate a need for improved early diagnosis and aggressive disease management to prevent and treat fragility fractures.

Racial Disparities and Inequalities in the Management of Patients With Osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disease characterized by low bone density and poor bone quality that weakens bones and increases the risk of fractures. Serious consequences of fractures include disability, loss of independence, and death. Despite the availability of clinical tools to evaluate fracture risk and medications to reduce fracture risk, many or most patients at risk, even those with a recent fracture, are not being treated. This represents a large osteoporosis treatment gap that has reached a crisis level. Importantly, the treatment gap is not evenly distributed among populations of different race/ethnicity. Black women are less likely to have bone density testing when indicated, are less likely to be treated, and have worse outcomes after a fracture than White women. This is a review and update of race-based disparities and inequalities, with suggestions for interventions to optimize patient care.

Assessment of Skeletal Strength: Bone Density Testing and Beyond.

A bone fractures when a force applied to it exceeds its strength. Assessment of bone strength is an important component in determining the risk of fracture and guiding treatment decisions. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is used to diagnosis osteoporosis, estimate fracture risk, and monitor changes in bone density. Fracture risk algorithms provide enhanced fracture risk predictability. Advanced technologies with computed tomography (CT) and MRI can measure parameters of bone microarchitecture. Mathematical modeling using CT data can evaluate the behavior of bone structures in response to external loading. Microindentation techniques directly measure the strength of outer bone cortex.

Healthcare Policy Changes in Osteoporosis Can Improve Outcomes and Reduce Costs in the United States.

In the United States, osteoporosis affects over 10 million adults, has high societal costs ($22 billion in 2008), and is currently being underdiagnosed and undertreated. Given an aging population, this burden is expected to rise. We projected the fracture burden in US women by modeling the expected demographic shift as well as potential policy changes. With the anticipated population aging and growth, annual fractures are projected to increase from 1.9 million to 3.2 million (68%), from 2018 to 2040, with related costs rising from $57 billion to over $95 billion. Policy-driven expansion of case finding and treatment of at-risk women could lower this burden, preventing 6.1 million fractures over the next 22 years while reducing payer costs by $29 billion and societal costs by $55 billion. Increasing use of osteoporosis-related interventions can reduce fractures and result in substantial cost-savings, a rare and fortunate combination given the current landscape in healthcare policy. © 2019 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Executive Summary of the 2019 ISCD Position Development Conference on Monitoring Treatment, DXA Cross-calibration and Least Significant Change, Spinal Cord Injury, Peri-prosthetic and Orthopedic Bone Health, Transgender Medicine, and Pediatrics.

To answer important questions in the fields of monitoring with densitometry, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry machine cross-calibration, monitoring, spinal cord injury, periprosthetic and orthopedic bone health, transgender medicine, and pediatric bone health, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) held a Position Development Conference from March 20 to 23, 2019. Potential topics requiring guidance were solicited from ISCD members in 2017. Following that, a steering committee selected, prioritized, and grouped topics into Task Forces. Chairs for each Task Force were appointed and the members were co-opted from suggestions by the Steering Committee and Task Force Chairs. The Task Forces developed key questions, performed literature searches, and came up with proposed initial positions with substantiating draft publications, with support from the Steering Committee. An invited Panel of Experts first performed a review of draft positions using a modified RAND Appropriateness Method with voting for appropriateness. Draft positions deemed appropriate were further edited and presented at the Position Development Conference meeting in an open forum. A second round of voting occurred after discussions to approve or reject the positions. Finally, a face-to-face closed session with experts and Task Force Chairs, and subsequent electronic follow-up resulted in 34 Official Positions of the ISCD approved by the ISCD Board on May 28, 2019. The Official Positions and the supporting evidence were submitted for publication on July 1, 2019. This paper provides a summary of the all the ISCD Adult and Pediatric Official Positions, with the new 2019 positions highlighted in bold.

Repeating Vertebral Fracture Assessment: 2019 ISCD Official Position.

Vertebral fracture (VF) is the most common type of osteoporotic fracture. VFs are associated with a decline in quality of life and high morbidity and mortality. The presence of a VF is a significant risk factor for developing another fracture; however, most VFs are not clinically recognized and diagnosed. Vertebral fracture assessment by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is a low cost, low radiation, convenient, and reliable method to identify VFs. The finding of a previously unrecognized VF may change the assessment of fracture risk, diagnostic classification, and treatment strategies. Vertebral fracture assessment or radiographic lateral spine imaging should be repeated in patients with continued high risk for fracture (e.g., historical height loss >4 cm [>1.5 inches], self-reported but undocumented vertebral fracture, or glucocorticoid therapy equivalent to ≥5 mg of prednisone or equivalent per day for greater than or equal to 3 months).

Stop the war on DXA!

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a versatile technology that is widely used in clinical practice in the management of osteoporosis and other skeletal diseases. It is a safe and inexpensive procedure that measures bone mineral density (BMD) to diagnose osteoporosis, assess fracture risk, and monitor osteoporosis treatment. However, DXA has been subjected to recurring claims that it is overutilized, too expensive, and not helpful in patient management. In recent years, there has been a decline in the number of office-based DXA facilities, a reduction in BMD tests performed, and fewer women being diagnosed and treated for osteoporosis, despite aging of the population with more people at risk for fractures. Here, we identify some of the challenges to DXA, which in the aggregate amount to a disturbing war on DXA and, as a result, a threat to good patient care. We suggest potential strategies to restore DXA to its proper role in osteoporosis management.

Hip fracture trends in the United States, 2002 to 2015.

An analysis of United States (US) Medicare claims data from 2002 to 2015 for women aged ≥ 65 years found that age-adjusted hip fracture rates for 2013, 2014, and 2015 were higher than projected, resulting in an estimated increase of more than 11,000 hip fractures. INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures are a major public health concern due to high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenses. Previous studies have reported a decrease in the annual incidence of hip fractures in the US beginning in 1995, coincident with the introduction of modern diagnostic tools and therapeutic agents for osteoporosis. In recent years, there has been less bone density testing and fewer prescriptions for osteoporosis treatments. The large osteoporosis treatment gap raises concern of possible adverse effects on hip fracture rates. METHODS: We assessed hip fracture incidence in the US to determine if the previous decline in hip fracture incidence continued. Using 2002 to 2015 Medicare Part A and Part B claims for women ≥ 65 years old, we calculated age-adjusted hip fracture rates, weighting to the 2014 population. RESULTS: We found that hip fracture rates declined each year from 2002 to 2012 and then plateaued at levels higher than projected for years 2013, 2014, and 2015. CONCLUSIONS: The plateau in age-adjusted hip fracture incidence rate resulted in more than 11,000 additional estimated hip fractures over the time periods 2013, 2014, and 2015. We recommend further study to assess all factors contributing to this remarkable change in hip fracture rate and to develop strategies to reduce the osteoporosis treatment gap.

Hypophosphatasia in Adults: Clinical Assessment and Treatment Considerations.

Hypophosphatasia (HPP) is a rare inherited disorder of bone affecting approximately 500 to 600 known individuals in the United States. HPP is the result of mutations involving the gene for tissue nonspecific alkaline phosphatase. Five clinical types of HPP are recognized. The clinical presentation of HPP varies from devastating prenatal intrauterine disease to mild manifestations in adulthood. In adults, main clinical involvement includes early loss of primary or secondary teeth, osteoporosis, bone pain, chondrocalcinosis, and fractures. Treatment for HPP is limited. Asfotase alfa is a subcutaneously administered synthetic human alkaline phosphatase that is approved for treatment of patients, including adults, with perinatal/infantile- and juvenile-onset HPP. However, guidelines for the treatment of adults with HPP are not available. This discussion addresses diagnostic and treatment considerations for adults with HPP. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

The Clinical Utility of Vertebral Fracture Assessment in Predicting Fractures.

Vertebral fracture (VF) is the most common type of osteoporotic fracture. VFs are associated with diminished quality of life and high morbidity and mortality. The presence of a VF, especially a recent one, is an important risk factor for developing another fracture. However, most VFs are not clinically recognized. VF assessment by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is a convenient, low-cost, low-radiation, reliable method to identify VFs during bone mineral density measurement. The finding of a previously unrecognized VF may change the diagnostic classification, assessment of fracture risk, and treatment strategies. This paper focuses on the utility of VF assessment in clinical practice.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Osteoporosis Before and After Fracture: A Side-by-Side Analysis of Commercially Insured and Medicare Advantage Osteoporosis Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although treatment for osteoporosis is recommended by U.S. clinical guidelines, a lack of diagnosis and treatment is common among patients with osteoporotic fractures. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment before and after various types of fractures. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims analysis using data from the Humana Medicare Advantage claims (Medicare group) and Optum Insight Clinformatics Data Mart commercial claims (Commercial group). Patients included in the study had a claim for a qualifying fracture occurring between January 2008 and December 2013 (the index fracture), were continuously enrolled in the health plan for ≥ 1 year before and after the index fracture, and were aged ≥ 65 years in the Medicare group or ≥ 50 years in the Commercial group at the time of the index fracture. Fragility fractures and osteoporosis diagnoses were identified from ICD-9-CM codes. Treatment for osteoporosis included oral and injectable therapies identified by National Drug Code numbers and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes. Diagnosis and treatment rates were assessed during the 1-year periods before and after the index fracture. All analyses were conducted by fracture type (vertebral, hip, nonhip/nonvertebral [NHNV], and multiple), with stratification by age and sex. No comparisons were made between the Medicare and Commercial groups; rather, McNemar tests were used to compare prefracture versus postfracture diagnosis and treatment rates within each group. RESULTS: For inclusion in the Medicare group, 45,603 patients were identified, and 54,145 patients were identified for the Commercial group. In the prefracture period, the osteoporosis diagnosis rates ranged from 12.0% (NHNV) to 21.5% (vertebral) in the Medicare group and from 5.3% (NHNV) to 12.1% (vertebral) in the Commercial group. In the postfracture period, diagnosis rates significantly increased (P < 0.001)-and nearly doubled-for all fracture types but did not exceed 42.1% (vertebral) in the Medicare group and 27.7% (vertebral) in the Commercial group. Pre-index treatment rates were similarly low, ranging from 9.4% (hip) to 16.6% (vertebral) among Medicare patients, and 7.5% (NHNV) to 14.4% (vertebral) in Commercial patients. Osteoporosis treatment rates improved significantly in the postfracture year, ranging from 12.5% (NHNV) to 26.5% (vertebral) among Medicare patients, and 8.3% (NHNV) to 21.4% (vertebral) in Commercial patients. Larger increases in diagnosis rates and smaller increases in treatment rates were observed in stratified analyses of men and women and of different age groups, with women and older patients having higher overall rates of diagnosis and treatment before and after fracture. CONCLUSIONS: In men and women, osteoporosis diagnosis rates were low before the index fracture and improved substantially after the fracture, yet still remained low overall (under 50%). Osteoporosis treatment rates among patients experiencing a fracture were low before the index fracture and improved only minimally afterwards. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Merck & Co. Other than through the employer relationship disclosed here, Merck & Co. did not have a role in the study design, data collection, interpretation of the data, in writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Weaver is an employee of Merck & Co. Sajjan was an employee of Merck & Co. and owned stock in the company at the time of the study. Lewiecki has received consulting and/or speaker honoraria from Merck & Co., AbbVie, AgNovos Healthcare, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Radius Health, Shire, and TheraNova, along with research grant support from Merck & Co., Amgen, and Eli Lilly and Company, and serves as a board member for the National Osteoporosis Foundation, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, and the Osteoporosis Foundation of New Mexico. Harris has received consulting honoraria from Merck & Co., Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Primus Pharmaceuticals, and Radius Health. Study concept and design were contributed by Weaver and Sajjan. Sajjan collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by all the authors. The manuscript was written and revised by Weaver, Lewiecki, and Harris.

Prevalence and Cost of Subsequent Fractures Among U.S. Patients with an Incident Fracture.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and cost of subsequent fractures among patients with an incident fracture are not well defined. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of, and costs associated with, subsequent fractures in the year after an incident fracture. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims database analysis using data from Humana Medicare Advantage claims (Medicare group) and Optum Insight Clinformatics Data Mart commercial claims (commercial group). Patients included in the study had a claim for a qualifying fracture occurring between January 2008 and December 2013 (index fracture), were continuously enrolled in the health plan for ≥ 1 year before and after the index fracture, and were aged ≥ 65 years in the Medicare group or ≥ 50 years in the commercial group at the time of the index fracture. Subsequent fractures were identified by ICD-9-CM codes and were defined as the second fracture occurring ≥ 3 to ≤ 12 months after the index fracture (≥ 6 to ≤ 12 months for fractures at the same site as the index fracture). Rates of subsequent fractures were calculated as the number of patients who had a subsequent fracture divided by the total sample size. After propensity matching of demographic and clinical variables, we determined the total medical and pharmacy costs accrued within 1 year of the index fracture by patients with and without a subsequent fracture. Health care costs were compared between patients with and without a subsequent fracture using McNemar's test. RESULTS: A total of 45,603 patients were included in the Medicare group, and 54,145 patients were included in the commercial group. In the Medicare group, 7,604 (16.7%) patients experienced a subsequent fracture. The proportion of patients with a subsequent fracture was highest among patients with multiple index fractures (26.2%, n = 905), followed by those with hip (25.5%, n = 1,280) and vertebral (20.2%, n = 1,908) index fractures. In the commercial group, 6,256 (11.6%) patients experienced a subsequent fracture. The proportion of patients with a subsequent fracture paralleled those observed in the Medicare group: 24.5% (n = 808) in patients with multiple index fractures, 22.0% (n = 525) in those with hip fracture, and 14.5% (n = 841) in those with vertebral fracture. For vertebral, hip, and nonhip nonvertebral fractures, subsequent fractures were most frequently of the same type as the index fracture. The mean total health care cost (sum of medical and pharmacy costs) in the year following the incident fracture for the Medicare group was $27,844 and differed significantly between patients with and without a subsequent fracture ($34,897 vs. $20,790; P < 0.001). The mean total health care cost in the year following the incident fracture for the commercial group was $29,316 and also differed significantly between patients with and without a subsequent fracture ($39,501 vs. $19,131; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with an incident fracture, those who experienced a subsequent fracture in the following year had significantly higher health care costs than those who did not. A subsequent fracture is most likely to be of the same type as the initial fracture. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Merck & Co. Other than through the employer relationships disclosed here, Merck & Co did not have a role in the study design, data collection, interpretation of the data, in writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Weaver and Marvos are employees of Merck & Co. Sajjan was an employee of Merck & Co. and owned stock in the company at the time of the study. Lewiecki has received consulting and/or speaker honoraria from Merck, AbbVie, AgNovos Healthcare, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Radius Health, Shire, and TheraNova. Lewiecki has received research grant support from Merck, Amgen, and Eli Lilly and Company and serves as a board member for the National Osteoporosis Foundation, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, and the Osteoporosis Foundation of New Mexico. Harris has received consulting honoraria from Merck, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Primus Pharmaceuticals, and Radius Health. Study concept and design were contributed by Weave and Sajjan. Lewiecki collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by all the authors. The manuscript was written and revised by Weaver, Lewiecki, and Harris.

Bone density measurement and assessment of fracture risk.

The most useful methods for estimating fracture risk are bone mineral density (BMD) testing by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and consideration of clinical risk factors (CRFs) for fracture. The combination of BMD and CRFs predicts fractures better than BMD or CRFs alone. FRAX is a computer-based fracture risk algorithm developed by the World Health Organization to estimate fracture probability using validated CRFs and femoral neck BMD, when available. BMD and FRAX are included in clinical practice guidelines to identify patients at high fracture risk who are most likely to benefit from pharmacologic therapy to reduce fracture risk.

Skeletal health in long-duration astronauts: nature, assessment, and management recommendations from the NASA Bone Summit.

Concern about the risk of bone loss in astronauts as a result of prolonged exposure to microgravity prompted the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to convene a Bone Summit with a panel of experts at the Johnson Space Center to review the medical data and research evidence from astronauts who have had prolonged exposure to spaceflight. Data were reviewed from 35 astronauts who had served on spaceflight missions lasting between 120 and 180 days with attention focused on astronauts who (1) were repeat fliers on long-duration missions, (2) were users of an advanced resistive exercise device (ARED), (3) were scanned by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) at the hip, (4) had hip bone strength estimated by finite element modeling, or (5) had lost >10% of areal bone mineral density (aBMD) at the hip or lumbar spine as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Because of the limitations of DXA in describing the effects of spaceflight on bone strength, the panel recommended that the U.S. space program use QCT and finite element modeling to further study the unique effects of spaceflight (and recovery) on bone health in order to better inform clinical decisions.

Imaging technologies for assessment of skeletal health in men.

Conventional radiography can detect most fractures, evaluate their healing, and visualize characteristic skeletal abnormalities for some metabolic bone diseases. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is used to measure areal bone mineral density (BMD) in order to diagnose osteoporosis, estimate fracture risk, and monitor changes in BMD over time. Vertebral fracture assessment by DXA can diagnose vertebral fractures with less ionizing radiation, greater patient convenience, and lower cost than conventional radiography. Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) measures volumetric BMD separately in cortical and trabecular bone compartments. High resolution peripheral QCT and high resolution magnetic resonance imaging are noninvasive research tools that assess the microarchitecture of bone. The use of these technologies and others has been associated with special challenges in men compared with women, provided insights into differences in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis in men and women, and enhanced understanding of the mechanisms of action of osteoporosis treatments.

Bone densitometry and vertebral fracture assessment.

Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) is used to diagnose osteoporosis, assess fracture risk, and monitor response to therapy. Of the different methods for measuring BMD, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the only technology for classifying BMD according to criteria established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the only technology that is validated for BMD input with the WHO fracture risk assessment algorithm, FRAX. Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) by DXA provides an image of the thoracic and lumbar spine for the purpose of detecting vertebral fracture deformities. Identification of a previously unrecognized vertebral fracture may change diagnostic classification, assessment of fracture risk, and treatment decisions. In comparison with standard radiographs of the spine, the correlation for detecting moderate and severe vertebral fractures is good, with a smaller dose of ionizing irradiation, greater patient convenience, and lower cost. Optimal performance of DXA and VFA requires training and adherence to quality standards.

Vertebral Fracture Assessment by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: insurance coverage issues in the United States. A White Paper of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

Clinical trial data and fracture risk prediction models unequivocally demonstrate the utility of identifying prevalent vertebral fractures to predict future fractures of all types. Knowledge of prevalent vertebral fractures can alter patient management decisions and result in initiation of therapy to reduce fracture risk in some patients who would not otherwise be treated. Cost-benefit analysis demonstrates that identifying and treating patients with vertebral fractures, even those with a densitometric classification of osteopenia, is cost effective. Vertebral fractures can be readily identified in the office setting using standard radiography or Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA), a software addition to a central dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) machine. In the United States, VFA was assigned a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code in January 2005. Nevertheless, coverage of VFA has not been uniformly embraced by Medicare carriers, companies that contract with the federal government to administer Medicare coverage and process claims for a region of the United States. Unlike DXA, for which uniform national coverage of qualified Medicare beneficiaries is mandated by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, VFA coverage policies are determined by the local Medicare carriers. Third-party insurers are also variable in their coverage of VFA. This International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) White Paper documents the role of VFA in the evaluation and treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and compares it with standard spine radiography. Arguments used by some Medicare carriers and insurers to deny coverage of VFA in the United States are analyzed and critiqued. For health care providers within the United States, this White Paper may serve as a resource to respond to insurers who deny coverage of VFA. For health care providers regardless of their country, this article underscores the value of VFA as an alternative to spine radiography in the evaluation and management of postmenopausal women with suspected osteoporosis.

An integrated approach: bisphosphonate management for the treatment of osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis is underrecognized and undertreated despite the availability of effective therapies that reduce fracture risks. Bisphosphonates are currently the most widely prescribed pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis. Oral bisphosphonates are typically managed under the pharmacy benefit of a health plan. With the recent availability of intravenous bisphosphonates, osteoporosis therapies now cross both the traditional pharmacy and medical benefit boundaries. Determining the most appropriate and cost-effective treatment for specific populations requires best practices that integrate both pharmacy and medical benefit considerations. When developing policy as part of these best practices, medical directors and pharmacy directors must consider efficacy, safety, cost, convenience, and mode of administration for each of the bisphosphonate formulations. This continuing education activity, based on a roundtable of managed care experts, explores new approaches for developing an effective bisphosphonate management policy for the treatment of osteoporosis.

Clinical review: Clinical applications of vertebral fracture assessment by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.

CONTEXT: Vertebral fracture (VF) is the most common type of fragility fracture, yet most VFs are not clinically apparent. VFs are associated with a significant increase in morbidity, mortality, and risk of future fracture. Many patients with VFs do not have T-scores classified as osteoporosis. Knowledge of VFs may change diagnostic classification, estimation of future fracture risk, and clinical management. VF assessment (VFA) by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry is a method for imaging the spine to diagnose VFs. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Background information and medical evidence on the technology and clinical applications of VFA was acquired by electronic searching of PubMed for appropriate terms that included vertebral fracture, imaging, diagnosis, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, and cost effectiveness. Matches with the highest levels of medical evidence were selected for review, recognizing that the new and evolving nature of the field required inclusion of some material that relied partly on expert opinion. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The sensitivity and specificity of VFA compare favorably with spine radiographs in the ability to diagnose grade 2 and 3 VFs. VFA involves less radiation, lower cost, and often greater patient convenience than spine radiography. Cost effectiveness modeling suggests that imaging of the spine in selected patients provides essential diagnostic and therapeutic information at a nominal cost. Patients with T-scores that are classified as low bone mass (osteopenia) who are selected for pharmacological therapy based on the presence of a VF benefit by reduction in fracture risk. Guidelines for the clinical application of VFA have been developed by the International Society for Clinical Densitometry. CONCLUSIONS: VFA is a technology for diagnosing VFs that may alter diagnostic classification, improve fracture risk stratification, and identify patients likely to benefit from pharmacological therapy who otherwise might not be treated.