ArticleBMJ open2018
Feasibility and tolerability of bone impact microindentation testing: a cross-sectional, population-based study in Australia.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Added Value of Impact Microindentation in the Evaluation of Bone Fragility: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020Pooled it
- Associations between bone material strength index and FRAX scores.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2025Article
- The practicality of using bone impact microindentation in a population-based study of women: A Geelong-Osteoporosis Study.Bone reports · 2024Article
- Evaluating Osteoporosis in Chronic Kidney Disease: Both Bone Quantity and Quality Matter.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- For older individuals there is greater variance in low mean Bone Material Strength Index values obtained with the OsteoProbe.Bone reports · 2023Article
- Mean Bone Material Strength Index Values for Women are Lower Than Those for Men: Data from a Single Geographical Location.Calcified tissue international · 2023Article
- Associations Between Aldosterone-Renin-Ratio and Bone Parameters Derived from Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography and Impact Microindentation in Men.Calcified tissue international · 2023Article
- Safety Outcomes of Impact Microindentation: A Prospective Observational Study in the Netherlands.JBMR plus · 2023Article
- Reference Intervals for Bone Impact Microindentation in Healthy Adults: A Multi-Centre International Study.Calcified tissue international · 2023Article
- Associations between Bone Material Strength Index, Calcaneal Quantitative Ultrasound, and Bone Mineral Density in Men.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2021Article
- Treatments of osteoporosis increase bone material strength index in patients with low bone mass.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020Article
- Normative Data for Impact Microindentation for Australian Men: Cross-Sectional Data From the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.JBMR plus · 2020Article
- Fracture prediction, imaging and screening in osteoporosis.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe OsteoProbe measures Bone Material Strength Index (BMSi) of cortical bone in living humans using impact microindentation (IMI). Research using this minimally invasive technique is expanding yet, to-date, there have been no reports about its feasibility in the research setting. In this study, we assessed the feasibility and tolerability of using the OsteoProbe in men enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.
designCross-sectional analysis of data collected in a population-based study.
settingBarwon Statistical Division, southeastern Australia, 2016-2018.
methodsFor 252 of 345 consecutive participants (ages 33-96 years), BMSi was measured using the OsteoProbe at the mid-tibia. Immediately following measurement, each participant used a Visual Analogue Scale (0-10) to rate the level of discomfort that was anticipated and experienced, their initial reluctance towards the measurement and their willingness to repeat measurement.
resultsReasons for non-measurement in 92 men were needle phobia (n=8), discomfort after first indentation (n=5), skin infections (n=21), excessive soft tissues around the mid-tibia region (n=56), inability to provide informed consent (n=2). Among 252 men who had IMI measures, the expectation for pain during measurement was low (1.54±1.56), as was actual pain experienced (0.38±0.71). Reluctance to undergo measurement was low (0.34±0.93). All participants indicated a willingness to have the measurement performed again. Mean (±SD) BMSi was 83.0±6.4 (range 62.3-93.0).
conclusionIn this study, the procedure was well accepted by participants suggesting that IMI testing with the OsteoProbe is feasible in a research setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.