Diabetes, Obesity, and Osteoporosis in an Ethnically Diverse Population of Women Receiving Osteoporosis Screening

Osteoporosis screening by bone density (BMD) testing is recommended for women aged 65-75 years. However, patients with diabetes, a risk factor for fracture, often have higher body mass index (BMI) which contributes to higher BMD. These factors may vary by race/ethnicity. The relationship of diabetes (≥2 diagnoses and treatment), obesity (BMI ≥30), and BMD-defined osteoporosis (femoral neck BMD T-score ≤ -2.5) was examined in a diverse primary care population of 44,313 non-Hispanic White, 6,103 Black, 7,777 Hispanic, and 12,634 Asian women aged 65-75 years who underwent BMD screening. Those with recent fracture, osteoporosis treatment, bone disorders, and metastatic cancer were excluded. Modified log-Poisson regression was used to examine the association of diabetes and BMD-osteoporosis. Among 70,827 women, 18% had diabetes. The prevalence of diabetes was 2-fold higher in Black, Hispanic and Asian women compared to White women. Overall, women with diabetes (versus no diabetes) were more likely to be obese and, except for Hispanic women, less likely to have BMD-osteoporosis. In unadjusted analyses, diabetes was associated with lower risk of BMD-defined osteoporosis in White, Black, and Asian women, but not Hispanic women. However, the association was attenuated or no longer evident after adjusting for BMI, suggesting that the lower burden of BMD-osteoporosis in women with diabetes is mediated in part by higher BMI. These findings support consideration of diabetes when assessing fracture risk in women undergoing osteoporosis screening. However, more studies in non-White populations with a high burden of diabetes are important since these relationships appear to differ by race/ethnicity.

Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening in Women Over 40-Year-Old

Osteoporosis is a disease recognized by bone density reduction and is particularly common among older women, which imposes them to fractures. The evidence shows that if do no serious conflict with this issue, in the far little future, huge costs will be imposed on individuals, families, and the country. In this study, we studied the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening in women over 40 years of age in Shiraz in 2016. This cross-sectional study was performed on 240 persons who were screened and 240 non-screened persons in the bone mineral density ward of Shiraz Namazi Hospital. The costs were identified and from the perspective of the insurer and the payer, which included only direct health care costs. To measure the effectiveness, the use of indicators as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), the expected cost and effectiveness, and the Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. The results showed that non-screening is the best strategy, given that the amount of ICER was obtained at $38484.56 and the threshold. As a result, the non-screening method compared to screening is cost-effective. The relevant authorities and proficients should prevent the progression of disease complications and consequently prevent the increase of the disease cost and improve the quality of life of the patients.

Is jaw fractal dimension a reliable biomarker for osteoporosis screening? A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies

Objective: To summarize the evidence on the feasibility of maxillomandibular imaging exams-related fractal dimension (FD) in screening patients with osteoporosis. Methods: This registered systematic review followed the PRISMA-DTA statement. High sensitivity search strategies were developed for six primary databases and grey literature. QUADAS-2 items evaluated the risk of bias, and the GRADE approach assessed the evidence certainty. Results: From 1,034 records initially identified through database searching, four studies were included (total sample of 747 patients [osteoporosis, 136; control group, 611]). The meta-analysis showed that the overall sensitivity and specificity of the FD were 86.17 and 72.68%, respectively. In general, all studies showed low RoB and applicability concern. The certainty of the evidence was very low to moderate. Conclusions: This systematic review showed that the jaw-related FD presented sensitivity and specificity values higher than 70%, and its sensitivity in osteoporosis screening was a better parameter than specificity.