Challenges of fracture risk assessment in Asian and Black women.

OBJECTIVES: Bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk calculators (eg, the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool [FRAX]) guide primary prevention care in postmenopausal women. BMD scores use non-Hispanic White (NHW) reference data for T-score classification, whereas FRAX incorporates BMD, clinical risk factors, and population differences when calculating risk. This study compares findings among Asian, Black, and NHW women who underwent osteoporosis screening in a US health care system. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: Asian, Black, and NHW women aged 65 to 75 years who underwent BMD testing (with no recent fracture, osteoporosis therapy, metastatic cancer, multiple myeloma, metabolic bone disorders, or kidney replacement therapy) were compared across the following measures: femoral neck BMD (FN-BMD) T-score (normal ≥ -1, osteoporosis ≤ -2.5), high FRAX 10-year hip fracture risk (FRAX-Hip ≥ 3%), FRAX risk factors, and diabetes status. RESULTS: Among 3640 Asian women, 23.8% had osteoporosis and 8.7% had FRAX-Hip scores of at least 3% (34.5% among those with osteoporosis). Among 11,711 NHW women, 12.3% had osteoporosis and 17.2% had FRAX-Hip scores of at least 3% (84.8% among those with osteoporosis). Among 1711 Black women, 68.1% had normal FN-BMD, 4.1% had BMD-defined osteoporosis, and 1.8% had FRAX-Hip scores of at least 3% (32.4% among those with osteoporosis). Fracture risk factors differed by group. Diabetes was 2-fold more prevalent in Black and Asian (35% and 36%, respectively) vs NHW (16%) women. CONCLUSIONS: A large subset of Asian women have discordant BMD and FRAX scores, presenting challenges in osteoporosis management. Furthermore, FN-BMD and especially FRAX scores identified few Black women at high fracture risk warranting treatment. Studies should examine whether fracture risk assessment can be optimized in understudied racial minority populations, particularly when findings are discordant.

Clinical Decision Support to Address Racial Disparities in Hypertension Control in an Integrated Delivery System: Evaluation of a Natural Experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Effective, equity-promoting interventions implemented by health care systems are needed to address health care disparities and population-level health disparities. We evaluated the impact of a clinical decision support tool to improve evidence-based thiazide diuretic prescribing among Black patients to address racial disparities in hypertension control. METHODS: We employed an interrupted time series design and qualitative interviews to evaluate the implementation of the tool. Our primary outcome measure was the monthly rate of thiazide use among eligible patients before and after implementation of the tool (January 2013-December 2016). We modeled month-to-month changes in thiazide use for Black and White patients, overall, and by sex and medical center racial composition. We conducted key informant interviews to identify modifiable facilitators and barriers to implementation of the tool across medical centers. RESULTS: Of the 318,720 patients, 15.5% were Black. We observed no change in thiazide use or blood pressure control following the implementation of the tool in either racial subgroup. There was a slight but statistically significant reduction (2.32 percentage points, p < 0.01) in thiazide use among Black patients following the removal the tool that was not observed among White patients. Factors affecting the tool's implementation included physician and pharmacist resistance to thiazide use and a lack of ongoing promotion of the tool. DISCUSSION: The clinical decision support tool was insufficient to change prescribing practices and improve blood pressure control among Black patients. CONCLUSIONS: Future interventions should consider physician attitudes about thiazide prescribing and the importance of multilevel approaches to address hypertension disparities.