scholarly journals Assessment of Bone Density of Patients Referred to Arak Densitometry Center from 2016 to 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Vol In Press (In Press) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Malekee ◽  
Mohsen Tabatabaei ◽  
Baharak Tasorian
Keyword(s):  
Bone Density ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Density Measurement ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Bone Density Measurement ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Abnormal Group

Background: Osteoporosis and subsequent fractures increased mortality and disability. Along with this fact, the demand for diagnostic tests has also increased in recent years, which has created a heavy financial burden on the health system. Objectives: The aim of this research was to evaluate the compatibility of the indications of performing the bone density measurement in Arak city with the criteria of the international sociality of clinical densitometry (ISCD). Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed from 2016 to 2017. Patients’ information was extracted from checklists recorded by a bone density measurement expert. Patients who lived in Arak and did not have an underlying condition that reduced the value of the bone mineral densitometry (BMD) test were studied. We collected the information of the patients who had undergone a bone density test at the discretion of their physician. Results: Here, 816 out of 1,354 bone density tests, requested by non-rheumatologists, were abnormal, and 538 were normal. In the abnormal group, 800 (98%) cases had ISCD indications for BMD application, and only 16 (2%) cases had no indication. However, 636 bone density tests were requested by rheumatologists that 474 were abnormal and 162 were normal, and in the abnormal group, 471 (99.4%) had ISCD indications for BMD, and only 3 (0.6%) cases had no indications. Conclusions: In many cases, bone mineral density has been requested based on ISCD indications (85.13%), and bone disorders have been well identified (64.83%). The study also demonstrates that BMD requests are common among different specialized groups, and when rheumatologists request a bone density, the test is highly sensitive (99.37%).

scholarly journals Appropriateness of bone density measurement in Switzerland: a cross-sectional study

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Zechmann ◽  
Nathalie Scherz ◽  
Oliver Reich ◽  
Beat Brüngger ◽  
Oliver Senn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Density ◽  
Density Measurement ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Bone Density Measurement ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

scholarly journals Bone Mineral Density Measurements: Are they Worth While?

1996 ◽  
Vol 89 (8) ◽  
pp. 457-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
D J Torgerson ◽  
C Donaldson ◽  
D M Reid
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Bone Density ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Density Measurement ◽  
Bone Density Measurement ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Density Measurements ◽  
Bone Mineral Measurements

Bone mineral density measurements have been criticized on the grounds that they are not a worth-while screening tool. In this paper we argue that bone mineral measurements can be an efficient diagnostic tool even if they are not of proven value for screening. There is complex relationship between the costs of a measurement, the intervention and the predictive value of the test all of which must be accounted for when assessing the value of a bone density measurement. For bone density measurements to be used for screening, a wider evaluation needs to be undertaken compared with that for their use as a diagnostic tool. We address some common objections, for example, that low compliance with screening would undermine efficiency, and show that these are not relevant. Evaluations of screening need to address issues that are likely to affect efficiency.

scholarly journals Somatic maturation and the relationship between bone mineral variables and types of sports among adolescents: cross-sectional study

2017 ◽  
Vol 135 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Ribeiro Agostinete ◽  
Igor Hideki Ito ◽  
Han Kemper ◽  
Carlos Marcelo Pastre ◽  
Mário Antônio Rodrigues-Júnior ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Peak Height ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Height Velocity ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Peak Height Velocity ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Cross Sectional

ABSTRACT CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Peak height velocity (PHV) is an important maturational event during adolescence that affects skeleton size. The objective here was to compare bone variables in adolescents who practiced different types of sports, and to identify whether differences in bone variables attributed to sports practice were dependent on somatic maturation status. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study, São Paulo State University (UNESP). METHODS: The study was composed of 93 adolescents (12 to 16.5 years old), divided into three groups: no-sport group (n = 42), soccer/basketball group (n = 26) and swimming group (n = 25). Bone mineral density and content were measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and somatic maturation was estimated through using peak height velocity. Data on training load were provided by the coaches. RESULTS: Adolescents whose PHV occurred at an older age presented higher bone mineral density in their upper limbs (P = 0.018). After adjustments for confounders, such as somatic maturation, the swimmers presented lower values for bone mineral density in their lower limbs, spine and whole body. Only the bone mineral density in the upper limbs was similar between the groups. There was a negative relationship between whole-body bone mineral content and the weekly training hours (β: -1563.967; 95% confidence interval, CI: -2916.484 to -211.450). CONCLUSION: The differences in bone variables attributed to sport practice occurred independently of maturation, while high training load in situations of hypogravity seemed to be related to lower bone mass in swimmers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document