Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35965277›Full record

ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2022

Implications of FRAX® adjusted for recent fracture on the indication of treatment in an FLS.

Antonio Naranjo, Amparo Molina, Carlos Rodríguez-Lozano, Rubén López, Sonia Fuentes, Soledad Ojeda

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The development and validation of a prediction model for imminent vertebral osteoporotic fracture in postmenopausal women.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Development and validation of a prediction model for falls among older people using community-based data.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Antonio NaranjoRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain. anarher@gobiernodecanarias.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2013-6664
Amparo MolinaRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain.
Carlos Rodríguez-LozanoRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain.
Rubén LópezRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain.
Sonia FuentesRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain.
Soledad OjedaRheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Barranco de La Ballena, 35011, Las Palmas, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We analyzed the practical consequences of applying an adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in a FLS. After analyzing 2777 patients, we concluded that the adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA and is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available. PURPOSE: A FRAX® adjusted to fractures less than 2 years old has been proposed. The objective of this work was to analyze the clinical implications of applying the adjusted FRAX® instead of the classic FRAX® in a fracture liaison service (FLS) unit.

methodsAdults aged 50 years or older with fragility fractures (hip, spine, humerus, and forearm) that occurred in the 12 months prior to the baseline visit were included. We recorded demographic data, type of fracture, DXA, classic FRAX®, and FRAX® adjusted for recent fractures and indications for anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) following the guidelines of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology.

resultsA total of 2777 patients were included, mean age 73 years, 84% women. The type of fracture was as follows: forearm (n = 958; 34.5%), hip (n = 781; 28.1%), humerus (n = 642; 23.1%), and spine (n = 397, 14.3%). DXA was performed in 2134 cases (76.8%). A total of 2522 patients (90.8%) were candidates for AOM (100% involving the hip and spine, 83% forearm, and 85% humerus). FRAX®-hip ≥ 3% increased from 1601 to 1775 cases (57.6 to 64%). The average FRAX®-hip (SD) increased from 5.7 (6) to 7.5 (9) (4.6 to 8.8 in males and 5.9 to 7.3 in females). The percentage of forearm fracture candidates for AOM, with or without DXA, did not change after FRAX®-hip adjustment, while the number of patients with humerus fractures increased from 59 to 80% in those who did not have DXA. In the entire sample, FRAX®-adjusted led to an indication of AOM for 15 additional patients (0.5% of major fractures): 14 with a humerus fracture and 1 with a forearm fracture.

conclusionsThe adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in an FLS unit in an adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA; in fact, it is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available.

Indexed as

Bone DensityHip FracturesAdultAgedChild, PreschoolFemaleForearmHumansMaleFracture liaison serviceFRAX, FractureImminent riskOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID35965277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.