Development and validation of the fracture risk scale home care (FRS-HC) that predicts one-year incident fracture: an electronic record-linked longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Fractures have dire consequences including pain, immobility, and death. People receiving home care are at higher risk for fractures than the general population. Yet, current fracture risk assessment tools require additional testing and assume a 10-year survival rate, when many die within one year. Our objectives were to develop and validate a scale that predicts one-year incident hip fracture using the home care resident assessment instrument (RAI-HC). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of linked population data. People receiving home care in Ontario, Canada between April 1st, 2011 and March 31st, 2015 were included. Clinical data were obtained from the RAI-HC which was linked to the Discharge Abstract Database and National Ambulatory Care Reporting System to capture one-year incident hip fractures. Seventy-five percent (n = 238,011) of the sample were randomly assigned to a derivation and 25% (n = 79,610) to a validation sample. A decision tree was created with the derivation sample using known fracture risk factors. The final nodes of the decision tree were collapsed into 8 risk levels and logistic regression was performed to determine odds of having a fracture for each level. c-Statistics were calculated to compare the discriminative properties of the full, derivation, and validation samples. RESULTS: Approximately 60% of the sample were women and 53% were 80 years and older. A total of 11,526 (3.6%) fractures were captured over the 1-year time period. Of these, 5057 (43.9%) were hip fractures. The proportion who experienced a hip fracture in the next year ranged from 0.3% in the lowest risk level to 5.2% in the highest risk level. People in the highest risk level had 18.8 times higher odds (95% confidence interval, 14.6 to 24.3) of experiencing a hip fracture within one year than those in the lowest. c-Statistics were similar for the full (0.658), derivation (0.662), and validation (0.645) samples. CONCLUSIONS: The FRS-HC predicts hip fracture over one year and should be used to guide clinical care planning for home care recipients at high risk for fracture. Our next steps are to develop a fracture risk clinical assessment protocol to link treatment recommendations with identified fracture risk.

Comparison of Speed of Sound Measures Assessed by Multisite Quantitative Ultrasound to Bone Mineral Density Measures Assessed by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in a Large Canadian Cohort: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos).

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is an important tool for the estimate of fracture risk through the measurement of bone mineral density (BMD). Similarly, multisite quantitate ultrasound can prospectively predict future fracture through the measurement of speed of sound (SOS). This investigation compared BMD (at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine) and SOS measures (at the distal radius, tibia, and phalanx sites) in a large sample of randomly-selected and community-based individuals from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Furthermore, mass, height, and age were also compared with both measures. There were 4123 patients included with an age range of 30-96.8 yr. Pearson product moment correlations between BMD and SOS measures were low (0.21-0.29; all p<0.001), irrespective of site. Mass was moderately correlated with BMD measures (0.40-0.58; p<0.001), but lowly correlated with SOS measures (0.03-0.13; p<0.05). BMD and SOS were negatively correlated to age (-0.17 to -0.44; p<0.001). When regression analyses were performed to predict SOS measures at the 3 sites, the models predicted 20%-23% of the variance, leaving 77%-80% unaccounted for. The SOS measures in this study were found to be largely independent from BMD measures. In areas with no or limited access to DXA, the multisite quantitative ultrasound may act as a valuable tool to assess fracture risk. In locales with liberal access to DXA, the addition of SOS to BMD and other clinical risk factors may improve the identification of those patients at high risk for future fracture.

A comparison of the effects of raloxifene and conjugated equine estrogen on bone and lipids in healthy postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Although many studies have assessed the effects of estrogen and raloxifene hydrochloride on bone mineral density and serum lipid concentrations, there are few direct comparative data. METHODS: Randomized placebo-controlled trial for 3 years, intention-to-treat analysis. Six hundred nineteen postmenopausal women with prior hysterectomy (mean age, 53.0 years) were studied in 38 centers in Europe, North America, Australasia, and South Africa. They were randomized to 60 mg/d or 150 mg/d of raloxifene, 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE), or placebo. Bone density of the lumbar spine and proximal femur, biochemical markers of bone turnover, and fasting serum lipid concentrations were assessed for 3 years. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, bone density in the lumbar spine progressively declined by 2.0% in the placebo group (P <.05), was stable in the 2 raloxifene groups, and increased 4.6% in the subjects receiving CEE (P <.001). Effects in both raloxifene groups were different from those observed in the CEE and placebo groups (P <.001). Bone density in the total hip showed similar results. Conjugated equine estrogen produced significantly greater depression of serum osteocalcin, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, and urine C-telopeptide, compared with raloxifene. Each of the active treatments caused comparable depression of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol below placebo levels (P <.001 at most time points). Raloxifene did not affect high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, whereas CEE increased it by 13.4% compared with placebo at 3 years (P <.001). Triglyceride concentrations increased 24.6% in the CEE group at 3 years (P <.003), a significantly greater change than in the raloxifene groups, which were 4.9% and 8.0% above baseline (P < or =.002) but not different from placebo. Urinary incontinence was reported in 11 women receiving CEE, but in only 1 or 2 in each of the other groups (P < or =.01 compared with the other groups). Hernias occurred less frequently in those receiving 150 mg/d of raloxifene or CEE (P =.03 vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Raloxifene and CEE have beneficial effects on bone density and bone turnover, although effects of CEE are more marked. Raloxifene and CEE produce different patterns of lipid responses and have distinct adverse effect profiles.